Vanderwater v. Sears

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vanderwater v. Sears

277 A.D.2d 1056, 716 N.Y.S.2d 495, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11405

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 13, 2000·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff Sheryl Vanderwater was injured when the automatic door at defendant’s store struck her while she stood next to it, looking out the window. A motion for summary judgment must be denied “if there is any significant doubt as to the existence of a triable issue, or if there is even arguably such an issue” (Hourigan v McGarry, 106 AD2d 845, 845-846, appeal dismissed 65 NY2d 637). Moreover, summary judgment is seldom appropriate in a negligence action (see, Andre v Pomeroy, 35 NY2d 361, 364-365). Arguably, an issue of fact exists whether defendant’s automatic door constitutes a dangerous condition. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Stone, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff Sheryl Vanderwater was injured when the automatic door at defendant’s store struck her while she stood next to it, looking out the window. A motion for summary judgment must be denied “if there is any significant doubt as to the existence of a triable issue, or if there is even arguably such an issue” (Hourigan v McGarry, 106 AD2d 845, 845-846, appeal dismissed 65 NY2d 637). Moreover, summary judgment is seldom appropriate in a negligence action (see, Andre v Pomeroy, 35 NY2d 361, 364-365). Arguably, an issue of fact exists whether defendant’s automatic door constitutes a dangerous condition. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Stone, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Vanderwater v. Sears, 277 A.D.2d 1056, 716 N.Y.S.2d 495, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

277 A.D.2d 1056 (Vanderwater v. Sears) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related