Torres v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Torres v. City of New York

80 A.D.3d 500, 914 N.Y.S.2d 633

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 20, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 80 A.D.3d 500 (Torres v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Torres v. City of New York, 80 A.D.3d 500, 914 N.Y.S.2d 633 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered on or about June 12, 2009, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant City’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Big Apple map depicting the intersection of Westchester Avenue and Simpson Street in the Bronx, where the accident allegedly occurred, raises a triable issue as to whether defendant City of New York had prior written notice of the cracked or broken curb on which plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell. Contrary to the argument in the City’s briefs, plaintiffs deposition testimony that he fell as he was crossing Simpson Street was consistent with the allegations of his notice of claim, verified complaint and verified bill of particulars. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered on or about June 12, 2009, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant City’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Big Apple map depicting the intersection of Westchester Avenue and Simpson Street in the Bronx, where the accident allegedly occurred, raises a triable issue as to whether defendant City of New York had prior written notice of the cracked or broken curb on which plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell. Contrary to the argument in the City’s briefs, plaintiffs deposition testimony that he fell as he was crossing Simpson Street was consistent with the allegations of his notice of claim, verified complaint and verified bill of particulars. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.3d 500, 914 N.Y.S.2d 633, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/torres-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2011.