Zwaanswijk v. City of New York

247 A.D.2d 379, 667 N.Y.S.2d 937, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 836

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, Queens County (Price, J.), dated November 14, 1997, as, upon renewal, adhered to the original determination dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant City of New York.

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

Upon granting the plaintiff’s motion for renewal, the Supreme Court properly adhered to its prior determination which dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant City of New York. The City breached no duty of care to the injured plaintiff (see, e.g., Tomassi v Town of Union, 46 NY2d 91, 97; Weiss v Fote, 7 NY2d 579; Demesmin v Town of Islip, 147 AD2d 519, 520).

O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, Santucci and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Zwaanswijk v. City of New York, 247 A.D.2d 379, 667 N.Y.S.2d 937, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

247 A.D.2d 379 (Zwaanswijk v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Weiss v. Fote
167 N.E.2d 63 (New York Court of Appeals, 1960)
Tomassi v. Town of Union
385 N.E.2d 581 (New York Court of Appeals, 1978)
Demesmimn v. Town of Islip
147 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)