Soto v. Anron Enterprises

293 A.D.2d 395, 740 N.Y.S.2d 618, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4077

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Luis Gonzalez, J.), entered June 5, 2001, which, inter alia, denied defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as there was evidence before the court sufficient to raise a triable issue as to whether appellants created or caused the alleged hazard, and to support the inference that the alleged hazard, situated upon a public sidewalk, posed a foreseeable risk to pedestrians such as the infant plaintiff, appellants’ motion for summary judgment was properly denied. ‘When one undertakes work in a public highway which, unless carefully done, will create conditions which are dangerous to members of the public using the highway, in the usual and ordinary manner, he is under a duty to use requisite care” (Boylhart v DiMarco & Reimann, 270 NY 217, 221). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.