Wernick v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wernick v. City of New York

40 A.D.3d 351, 834 N.Y.S.2d 469

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

DecidedMay 15, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.3d 351 (Wernick 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

Wernick v. City of New York, 40 A.D.3d 351, 834 N.Y.S.2d 469 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered January 18, 2006, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and dismissed as moot plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants demonstrated prima facie that they had no actual or constructive notice of the condition on the subway station staircase that allegedly caused plaintiffs injuries, and plaintiffs’ submissions failed to raise an issue of fact in that regard (Gold[352]*352man v Waldbaum, Inc., 248 AD2d 436 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 805 [1998]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Friedman, Sullivan, Buckley and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered January 18, 2006, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and dismissed as moot plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants demonstrated prima facie that they had no actual or constructive notice of the condition on the subway station staircase that allegedly caused plaintiffs injuries, and plaintiffs’ submissions failed to raise an issue of fact in that regard (Gold[352]*352man v Waldbaum, Inc., 248 AD2d 436 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 805 [1998]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Friedman, Sullivan, Buckley and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.3d 351, 834 N.Y.S.2d 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wernick-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack