From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Romano v. Kanner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 4, 1998
251 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 4, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Leone, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff commenced the instant action to recover damages for injuries allegedly sustained when he slipped and fell on a patch of ice located on the walkway leading to premises owned by the defendants.

The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that they neither created the allegedly dangerous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of it. The defendants' submission in support of their motion, which included the testimony of the plaintiff at his examination before trial, sufficiently established the absence of notice as a matter of law ( see, Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836; Arcuri v. Vitolo, 196 A.D.2d 519). The plaintiffs opposing affidavit was speculative and constituted "an attempt to avoid the consequences of dismissal by raising a feigned factual issue" ( Miller v. City of New York, 214 A.D.2d 657). Accordingly, the defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.

Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, J.J., concur.


Summaries of

Romano v. Kanner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 4, 1998
251 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Romano v. Kanner

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH ROMANO, Respondent, v. JOSHUA H. KANNER et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Jun 4, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
675 N.Y.S.2d 541

Citing Cases

O'Connor v. Telephone Dynamics Corp.

The defendant demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by establishing that…