From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kofod v. Town of East Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1996
226 A.D.2d 589 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 22, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the defendant's contentions that Town Law § 65-a (1) applies to this case because a public parking lot is a highway within the meaning of the statute ( see, Stratton v. City of Beacon, 91 A.D.2d 1018, 1019; see also, Zigman v. Town of Hempstead, 120 A.D.2d 520), and that prior written notice of the allegedly defective condition was therefore a condition precedent to maintaining this action ( see, Town Law § 65-a) absent proof that the defendant created the condition. However, the plaintiff's amended verified complaint sufficiently alleges the existence of such prior written notice. The plaintiff also alleges that the defendant affirmatively created the defective condition which caused her injuries ( see, Humes v. Town of Hempstead, 166 A.D.2d 503, 504). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint. O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kofod v. Town of East Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1996
226 A.D.2d 589 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Kofod v. Town of East Hampton

Case Details

Full title:ELAINE KOFOD, Respondent, v. TOWN OF EAST HAMPTON, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 22, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 589 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
641 N.Y.S.2d 361

Citing Cases

Bang v. Town of Smithtown

There is no dispute that the plaintiffs failed to comply with Town Law § 65-a(1) which, in pertinent part,…