From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rancano v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 8, 2000
273 A.D.2d 51 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

June 8, 2000.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered on or about December 7, 1999, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained in a trip and fall over a step stool in an office corridor, denied defendant premises occupant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Jeffrey J. Shapiro, for plaintiff-respondent.

Laurel A. Wedinger, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Tom, J.P., Wallach, Rubin, Saxe, Buckley, JJ.


Plaintiff's submissions raise an issue of fact as to whether the corridor in which she fell was dangerously cluttered with cardboard file boxes and step stools left there by file clerks. In addition, the affidavit of plaintiff's co-worker that he complained about the condition of the corridor, including the step stools, to defendant's personnel at least two or three times before plaintiff's accident, raises an issue of fact as to whether defendant had actual or, at least, constructive notice of the alleged danger (see, O'Connor-Miele v. Barhite Holzinger, 234 A.D.2d 106). Defendant's argument that the affidavit of this co-worker may not be considered because his existence was not revealed until after the case was put on the trial calendar is unsupported by a showing of prejudice or of willful disobedience of disclosure obligations (see, Cruz v. New York City Hous. Auth., 192 A.D.2d 322; compare, Vigio v. New York Hosp., 264 A.D.2d 668), and we therefore reject the contention.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Rancano v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 8, 2000
273 A.D.2d 51 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Rancano v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Case Details

Full title:CARMEN RANCANO, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. CHASE MANHATTAN BANK…

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

Date published: Jun 8, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 51 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
709 N.Y.S.2d 65

Citing Cases

Manrique v. Warshaw Woolen Associates, Inc.

When the parties could not agree, motion practice ensued, and resulted in the subject order, which, without…

DOUGHERTY v. QUEENS BALLPARK CO., LLC

As a preliminary matter, contrary to defendants' argument in reply, even assuming plaintiffs failed to…