From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Javier v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 24, 2018
161 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

6643 Index 154636/13

05-24-2018

Yanil JAVIER, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant–Appellant.

Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (Patrick J. Lawless of counsel), for appellant. Law Office of Ephrem J. Wertenteil, New York (Ephrem J. Wertenteil of counsel), for respondent.


Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (Patrick J. Lawless of counsel), for appellant.

Law Office of Ephrem J. Wertenteil, New York (Ephrem J. Wertenteil of counsel), for respondent.

Friedman, J.P., Gische, Andrias, Kern, Oing, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered April 21, 2017, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action where plaintiff was injured when, while descending an exterior stairway of a premises owned and operated by defendant, she tripped and fell on a crack that was allegedly present in the stairway. The record shows that defendant failed to demonstrate that it lacked actual notice of the stairway defect, since an April 2012 building inspection report states that the property's ramps, steps and railing required repair. Defendant also failed to demonstrate that it did not have constructive notice of the alleged defect, because it submitted evidence only as to the building's general cleaning routine, and failed to show when the stairway had last been inspected prior to the accident (see Rodriguez v. Board of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 107 A.D.3d 651, 652, 969 N.Y.S.2d 25 [1st Dept. 2013] ).

In light of defendant's failure to meet its initial burden to establish that it lacked actual or constructive notice of the defective condition of the stairway, the burden never shifted to plaintiff to establish how long the condition was in existence (see generally Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642 [1985] ).


Summaries of

Javier v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 24, 2018
161 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

Javier v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.

Case Details

Full title:Yanil JAVIER, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY…

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

Date published: May 24, 2018

Citations

161 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
161 A.D.3d 615
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 3736

Citing Cases

Robles v. 635 Owner, LLC

While no evidence establishes such facts, neither does this record demonstrate that the ladder did not…

Lindskog v. Live Nation Entm't, Inc.

As applied here, LNW has failed to meet its prima facie burden as it has not dispelled all questions of…