Weekes v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weekes v. City of New York

250 A.D.2d 354, 672 N.Y.S.2d 683, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5249

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

DecidedMay 5, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 250 A.D.2d 354 (Weekes 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

Weekes v. City of New York, 250 A.D.2d 354, 672 N.Y.S.2d 683, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered September 12, 1996, upon a jury verdict, in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered January 15, 1997, which, in an action against defendant City to recover for personal injuries sustained in a fall allegedly caused by a sidewalk defect, denied plaintiffs motion to set aside the verdict, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The appeal from the order is unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed within the appeal from the judgment.

Plaintiffs claim that it was error to submit to the jury the is[355]*355sue of whether the City had notice of the sidewalk defect that allegedly caused him to fall was not preserved by objection (CPLR 4110-b; see, Carrasquillo v American Type Founders Co., 183 AD2d 410, lv denied 81 NY2d 703), and we decline to review the claim. In any event, it is without merit in view of the variance between plaintiffs testimony concerning the nature of the defect and the markings on the Big Apple map that plaintiff claims gave the City notice as a matter of law. Nor is the finding that the map did not give the City notice of the alleged defect against the weight of the evidence. Concur— Lerner, P. J., Nardelli, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered September 12, 1996, upon a jury verdict, in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered January 15, 1997, which, in an action against defendant City to recover for personal injuries sustained in a fall allegedly caused by a sidewalk defect, denied plaintiffs motion to set aside the verdict, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The appeal from the order is unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed within the appeal from the judgment.

Plaintiffs claim that it was error to submit to the jury the is[355]*355sue of whether the City had notice of the sidewalk defect that allegedly caused him to fall was not preserved by objection (CPLR 4110-b; see, Carrasquillo v American Type Founders Co., 183 AD2d 410, lv denied 81 NY2d 703), and we decline to review the claim. In any event, it is without merit in view of the variance between plaintiffs testimony concerning the nature of the defect and the markings on the Big Apple map that plaintiff claims gave the City notice as a matter of law. Nor is the finding that the map did not give the City notice of the alleged defect against the weight of the evidence. Concur— Lerner, P. J., Nardelli, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 354, 672 N.Y.S.2d 683, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weekes-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack