From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gentles v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 2000
275 A.D.2d 388 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted June 14, 2000

August 21, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bruno, J.), dated September 13, 1999, which granted the defendant leave to move for summary judgment dismissing the complaint more than 120 days after the plaintiff filed a note of issue, and thereupon granted the motion.

Jonah Grossman, New York, N.Y. (Ronald Cohen of counsel), for appellant.

Wallace D. Gossett, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Anita Isola of counsel), for respondent.

Before: GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., FRED T. SANTUCCI, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant leave to move for summary judgment, although its motion was made more than 120 days after the plaintiff filed a note of issue (see, Quinlan v. Kaufman, 258 A.D.2d 453; Anzalone v. Varis, 254 A.D.2d 381 Eason v. Herber Middle School, 250 A.D.2d 807).

The plaintiff fell on an exposed staircase that was wet from rain. In opposition to the defendant's prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the wet stairs constituted a dangerous condition (see, King v. New York City Tr. Auth., 266 A.D.2d 354; Patrick v. Cho's Fruit Vegetables, 248 A.D.2d 692; Wessels v. Service Mdse., 187 A.D.2d 837; Marks v. Andros Broadway, 38 A.D.2d 926, affd 32 N.Y.2d 727). Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to submit proof in admissible form to support her contention that the staircase was designed or constructed improperly (see, Rosario v. New York City Tr. Auth., 215 A.D.2d 364; Hagan v. General Motors Corp., 194 A.D.2d 766, 768; Abrahamsen v. Brockway Glass Co., 156 A.D.2d 615, 617).


Summaries of

Gentles v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 2000
275 A.D.2d 388 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Gentles v. New York City Transit Authority

Case Details

Full title:SHARON GENTLES, APPELLANT, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, RESPONDENT

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

Date published: Aug 21, 2000

Citations

275 A.D.2d 388 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
712 N.Y.S.2d 875

Citing Cases

Verma v. City of New York

On their motions, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint insofar as asserted…

Spooner v. New York City Transit Authority

The plaintiff claimed that her accident was caused by a puddle of water in the bus near the steps. As the…