From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Atkins v. State

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 3, 2014
123 A.D.3d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2013-09741

12-03-2014

Edna ATKINS, appellant, v. STATE of New York, respondent.

Gruenberg Kelly Della, Ronkonkoma, N.Y. (Zachary M. Beriloff of counsel), for appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Matthew W. Grieco of counsel), for respondent.


Gruenberg Kelly Della, Ronkonkoma, N.Y. (Zachary M. Beriloff of counsel), for appellant.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Matthew W. Grieco of counsel), for respondent.

RANDALL T. ENG, P.J., JEFFREY A. COHEN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, and HECTOR D. LaSALLE, JJ.

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the claimant appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Lopez–Summa, J.), dated June 1, 2011, which, upon a decision of the same court dated April 7, 2011, made after a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, is in favor of the defendant and against her dismissing the claim.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In reviewing a determination made after a nonjury trial, the power of the Appellate Division is as broad as that of the trial court, and this Court may render the judgment it finds “warranted by the facts,” bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses (Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v. Town of Bedford, 60 N.Y.2d 492, 499, 470 N.Y.S.2d 350, 458 N.E.2d 809 ; see Steenbuck v. State of New York, 111 A.D.3d 819, 975 N.Y.S.2d 348 ; Perriello v. State, 106 A.D.3d 797, 964 N.Y.S.2d 624 ).

The Court of Claims' determination that the claimant failed to establish that the State of New York created, or had actual or constructive notice of, the icy condition on a walkway at Stony Brook University Medical Center (hereinafter the hospital) that caused her fall was warranted by the facts, and thus will not be disturbed (see Quintanilla v. State of New York, 94 A.D.3d 846, 848, 941 N.Y.S.2d 715 ). Contrary to the claimant's contention, the State had no more than a general awareness that icy conditions had developed on the grounds of the hospital following a snow storm, which was insufficient to constitute notice of the specific condition that caused the claimant to fall (see Piacquadio v. Recine Realty Corp., 84 N.Y.2d 967, 969, 622 N.Y.S.2d 493, 646 N.E.2d 795 ; Nesterenko v. Starrett City Assoc., L.P., 111 A.D.3d 806, 807, 975 N.Y.S.2d 123 ; Krieger v. McDonalds's Rest. of N.Y., Inc., 79 A.D.3d 1827, 1829, 914 N.Y.S.2d 480 ; Kostic v. Ascent Media Group, LLC, 79 A.D.3d 818, 819, 912 N.Y.S.2d 445 ; Gershfeld v. Marine Park Funeral Home, Inc., 62 A.D.3d 833, 834, 879 N.Y.S.2d 549 ; Kaplan v. DePetro, 51 A.D.3d 730, 731, 858 N.Y.S.2d 304 ).


Summaries of

Atkins v. State

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 3, 2014
123 A.D.3d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Atkins v. State

Case Details

Full title:Edna ATKINS, appellant, v. STATE of New York, respondent.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 3, 2014

Citations

123 A.D.3d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
123 A.D.3d 644
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8387

Citing Cases

Textor v. State

There were no other reported accidents or complaints about slippery conditions on the day of claimant's…

Goncalves v. State

"To constitute constructive notice, the defect must be visible and apparent and it must exist for a…