Yu Yan Zheng v. Fu Jian Hong Guan Am. Unity Assn., Inc.

2018 NY Slip Op 6811
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 11, 2018
Docket7306 152370/15
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 6811 (Yu Yan Zheng v. Fu Jian Hong Guan Am. Unity Assn., 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
Yu Yan Zheng v. Fu Jian Hong Guan Am. Unity Assn., Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 6811 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

Yu Yan Zheng v Fu Jian Hong Guan Am. Unity Assn., Inc. (2018 NY Slip Op 06811)
Yu Yan Zheng v Fu Jian Hong Guan Am. Unity Assn., Inc.
2018 NY Slip Op 06811
Decided on October 11, 2018
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on October 11, 2018
Friedman, J.P., Gische, Kapnick, Kahn, Oing, JJ.

7306 152370/15

[*1]Yu Yan Zheng, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

Fu Jian Hong Guan American Unity Association, Inc., et al., Defendants-Respondents.


Lurie, Ilchert, MacDonnell & Ryan, LLP, New York (Dennis A. Breen of counsel), for appellant.

Litchfield Cavo, LLP, New York (John V. Barbieri of counsel), for Fu Jian Hong Guan American Unity Association, Inc., respondent.

Gannon, Rosenfarb & Drossman, New York (Lisa L. Gokhulsingh of counsel), for Diane Chong, respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered September 15, 2017, which granted defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff does not dispute that defendants' obligation to clear the subject steps of snow and ice was suspended through the time of her accident under the storm in progress doctrine (see Solazzo v New York City Tr. Auth., 21 AD3d 735, 735-36 [1st Dept 2005], affd 6 NY3d 734, 735 [2005]; Weinberger v 52 Duane Assoc., LLC, 102 AD3d 618, 619 [1st Dept 2013]). Moreover, defendant Fu Jian demonstrated that it reasonably maintained the premises since there were non-skid strips on the stairs.

In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether defendants acted reasonably in maintaining the steps. In fact, plaintiff did not testify that her fall was caused by anything other than snow and ice.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: OCTOBER 11, 2018

CLERK



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

Related

Solazzo v. New York City Transit Authority
843 N.E.2d 748 (New York Court of Appeals, 2005)
Solazzo v. New York City Transit Authority
21 A.D.3d 735 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 6811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yu-yan-zheng-v-fu-jian-hong-guan-am-unity-assn-inc-nyappdiv-2018.