From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Silberberg v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 26, 1999
260 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

April 26, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Contrary to the appellant's contention, a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the allegedly dangerous condition was open and obvious ( see, Warren v. Town of Hempstead, 246 A.D.2d 536, 537; Kinfe v. Port Auth., 232 A.D.2d 373).

S. Miller, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Silberberg v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 26, 1999
260 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Silberberg v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:RHONDA SILBERBERG, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Defendants, and…

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

Date published: Apr 26, 1999

Citations

260 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
687 N.Y.S.2d 277

Citing Cases

Stelmack v. Town of Oyster Bay Housing Auth

The Supreme Court correctly found that issues of fact exist as to the cause of the plaintiff's fall (see…

Smith v. A.B.K. Apartments, Inc.

, there exists a triable issue of fact as to whether the depression in the floor, without a mat, constituted…