Summary
In Brownell, a jury verdict for plaintiff who fell on an icy sidewalk was supported by evidence that defendant's snow removal procedures caused snow to accumulate near curb cuts, and that defendant's salt-spreading caused snow to melt and refreeze at the curb cuts. Here again, curb cuts belong to the municipality and, of necessity, must be passable.
Summary of this case from Keating v. Town of Oyster BayOpinion
November 9, 2000.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J., and a jury), entered September 24, 1999, in an action to recover for personal injuries sustained in a slip and fall on an icy sidewalk, insofar as appealed from, apportioning fault 90% against defendant-appellant City, and awarding plaintiff damages of $709,222 before apportionment and structuring, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Brian J. Isaac, for plaintiff-respondent.
Before: Sullivan, P.J., Rosenberger, Williams, Ellerin, Buckley, JJ.
A reasonable view of the evidence supports a finding that defendant's snow removal procedures at the site where plaintiff fell, including, in particular, plowing that could cause snow to accumulate near curb cuts in the sidewalk and salt spreading that could cause snow to melt and re-freeze at curb cuts, were negligent and that such negligence created a dangerous condition that caused plaintiff to fall (see, Glick v. City of New York, 139 A.D.2d 402; Figueroa v. Lazarus Burman Assocs._, 269 A.D.2d 215). Nor does the award of damages materially deviate from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances. Plaintiff, in her forties, suffered a fractured tibia and fibula, underwent four surgeries and can be expected to undergo more, faces a prospect of degenerative arthritis in her ankle, which is permanently scared and swollen, and has suffered diminished ability to perform daily activities (cf., Dauria v. City of New York, 178 A.D.2d 289, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 751;Cranston v. Oxford Resources Corp., 173 A.D.2d 757, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 860.). We have considered defendant's other arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.