From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alonso v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 29, 2002
298 A.D.2d 311 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2040

October 29, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered on or about June 26, 2001, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

ALEXANDER J. WULWICK, for plaintiff-appellant.

YOLANDA L. HIMMELBERGER, for defendant-respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Buckley, Marlow, JJ.


The complaint was properly dismissed. The alleged hazard in this trip and fall action, temporary plywood flooring raised from the surrounding well-lit subway platform floor and painted bright yellow around the edges, was open and apparent and thus did not constitute a trap or snare for the unwary, and, under all the relevant circumstances, too trivial to be actionable (see Trincere v. County v. Suffolk, 90 N.Y.2d 976; Cruz v. Deno's Wonder Wheel Park, 297 A.D.2d 653).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Alonso v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 29, 2002
298 A.D.2d 311 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Alonso v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth

Case Details

Full title:FRANK ALONSO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 29, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 311 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
748 N.Y.S.2d 498

Citing Cases

Scarcella v. Kimco Realty Corp.

Moreover, liability for unsafe conditions on property generally extends only to conditions that are not open,…

Robinson v. Cambridge Realty Co., LLC

It did not amount to a dangerous condition, absent evidence that such defect presented a significant hazard…