Winker v. Buffalo Paperboard, Inc.

278 A.D.2d 858, 718 N.Y.S.2d 690, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13463

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. There are triable issues of fact whether defendants breached their duty to keep their premises “in a reasonably safe condition, considering all of the circumstances including the purpose of the [plaintiff’s] presence and the likelihood of injury” (Macey v Truman, 70 NY2d 918, 919, mot to amend remittitur granted 71 NY2d 949; see, Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 240-241; see also, Baker v Sportservice Corp., 142 AD2d 991, 992). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Joslin, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Hayes, J. P., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

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

Winker v. Buffalo Paperboard, Inc., 278 A.D.2d 858, 718 N.Y.S.2d 690, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13463 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

278 A.D.2d 858 (Winker v. Buffalo Paperboard, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Basso v. Miller
352 N.E.2d 868 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Macey v. Truman
519 N.E.2d 304 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
Baker v. Sportservice Corp.
142 A.D.2d 991 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)