From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Boatwright v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 17, 2003
304 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

845.

April 17, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered February 15, 2002, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Edward J. Pavia, Jr., for plaintiff-appellant.

Lawrence Heisler, for defendant-respondent.

Before: MAZZARELLI, J.P., ANDRIAS, FRIEDMAN, MARLOW, GONZALEZ, JJ.


Plaintiff was injured when he slipped and fell on a subway hatch installed in the sidewalk. The mere fact that the surface of the hatch was slippery when wet is insufficient to raise a triable issue as to negligence (Wasserstrom v. New York City Tr. Auth., 267 A.D.2d 36, 37,lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 761). The expert affidavit offered by plaintiff was of no value, since the expert's opinion was conclusory and was not supported by references to specific, currently applicable safety standards or practices (see Contreras v. Zabar's, 293 A.D.2d 362). Plaintiff did not raise a triable issue as to whether the subway hatch, which features the usual type of raised treads used on cellar hatches, was defective (see Cornwell v. Otis El. Co., 275 A.D.2d 649; Mosher v. Town of Oppenheim, 263 A.D.2d 605, 606; compare Radaelli v. City of Troy, 229 A.D.2d 882 [smooth grate lacking any treads]).

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


Summaries of

Boatwright v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 17, 2003
304 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Boatwright v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth

Case Details

Full title:STANLEY BOATWRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT…

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

Date published: Apr 17, 2003

Citations

304 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
758 N.Y.S.2d 307

Citing Cases

Velocci v. Stop & Shop

or a generally accepted safety practice (see Diaz v. New York Downtown Hosp. , 287 A.D.2d 357, 357–358, 731…

Minor v. E. Harlem Tutorial Program, Inc.

In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact. Her expert's opinion is speculative and conclusory…