Weisberg v. Town of Wallkill Boys & Girls Club, Inc.

126 A.D.3d 787, 2 N.Y.S.3d 802
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 11, 2015
Docket2013-02647
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 126 A.D.3d 787 (Weisberg v. Town of Wallkill Boys & Girls Club, Inc.) 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
Weisberg v. Town of Wallkill Boys & Girls Club, Inc., 126 A.D.3d 787, 2 N.Y.S.3d 802 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Marx, J.), dated January 7, 2013, as granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained when she slipped on dirt and rocks in an unpaved area of a park in which she was walking. In the order appealed from, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was granted.

The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint by demonstrating that the condition upon which the plaintiff slipped *788 was a “naturally occurring topographic condition,” inherent in the nature of the property, that the defendant “could not reasonably be expected to remedy” (Demuth v Best Buy Stores, L.P., 85 AD3d 713, 714 [2011]; cf. Badalbaeva v City of New York, 55 AD3d 764 [2008]; Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co. v Town of Oyster Bay, 40 AD3d 612 [2007]; Torres v State of New York, 18 AD3d 739 [2005]; Mazzola v Mazzola, 16 AD3d 629 [2005]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

The parties’ remaining contentions have been rendered academic in light of our determination.

Skelos, J.P., Balkin, Sgroi and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Chrin v. Gate of Heaven Cemetery
2021 NY Slip Op 00228 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Mugnai v. Town of Oyster Bay
2018 NY Slip Op 5324 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Mustafaj v. Macri
2018 NY Slip Op 4554 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Chojnacki v. Old Westbury Gardens, Inc.
2017 NY Slip Op 5706 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
126 A.D.3d 787, 2 N.Y.S.3d 802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weisberg-v-town-of-wallkill-boys-girls-club-inc-nyappdiv-2015.