Wu v. Landau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wu v. Landau

264 A.D.2d 571, 694 N.Y.S.2d 381, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8928

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

DecidedSeptember 2, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 571 (Wu v. Landau) 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

Wu v. Landau, 264 A.D.2d 571, 694 N.Y.S.2d 381, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8928 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered January 14, 1998, which denied the Landau defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted, and the complaint dismissed as against those defendants. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants-appellants dismissing the complaint as against them.

A landowner owes no duty to the public to maintain an abutting sidewalk in a safe condition unless said owner has used the sidewalk for a special purpose or created an unsafe condition (Xerri v Cooper Union for Advancement of Science & Art, 255 AD2d 165). Where injury to a pedestrian can be traced to debris overflowing from a sanitation receptacle, this is generally the responsibility of the municipality (Montalvo v Western Estates, 240 AD2d 45). Even if the owners of the building adjacent to the sidewalk did notify the Sanitation Department of a recurring problem due to inadequacy of the receptacle, this would not create a liability on their part where none exists as a matter of law. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered January 14, 1998, which denied the Landau defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted, and the complaint dismissed as against those defendants. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants-appellants dismissing the complaint as against them.

A landowner owes no duty to the public to maintain an abutting sidewalk in a safe condition unless said owner has used the sidewalk for a special purpose or created an unsafe condition (Xerri v Cooper Union for Advancement of Science & Art, 255 AD2d 165). Where injury to a pedestrian can be traced to debris overflowing from a sanitation receptacle, this is generally the responsibility of the municipality (Montalvo v Western Estates, 240 AD2d 45). Even if the owners of the building adjacent to the sidewalk did notify the Sanitation Department of a recurring problem due to inadequacy of the receptacle, this would not create a liability on their part where none exists as a matter of law. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 571, 694 N.Y.S.2d 381, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wu-v-landau-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack