Opinion
2002-05486
Submitted March 21, 2003.
April 28, 2003.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated March 21, 2002, as granted the motion of the defendant City of New York for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
Bornstein Emanuel, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Anthony J. Emanuel of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis F. Caputo and Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, THOMAS A. ADAMS, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff alleges that she tripped and fell as a result of a defective condition in a roadway in Queens. The City of New York established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that it neither created the condition nor had prior written notice of the alleged defect (see Administrative Code of the City of N.Y. § 7-201[c] [2]; Katz v. City of New York, 87 N.Y.2d 241; Kiernan v. Thompson, 73 N.Y.2d 840; Nash v. Village of Cedarhurst, 291 A.D.2d 485). In opposition, the plaintiff's speculative and conclusory allegations were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact with regard to whether the City may have created the condition (see e.g. Nash v. Village of Cedarhurst, supra; Stern v. Incorporated Vil. of Flower Hill, 278 A.D.2d 225; Verdes v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 253 A.D.2d 552; Cattani v. Incorporated Vil. of Ocean Beach, 252 A.D.2d 533).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the City dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
SANTUCCI, J.P., SCHMIDT, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.