Decided March 17, 1987 Appeal from (2d dept: 123 A.D.2d 662) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED OR DENIED
The court erred in applying the holdings reflected in Turco (supra) and Schare (supra) to the particular facts of this case. It is clear that an object — metal or otherwise — which protrudes above or in some other way obstructs the surface of municipal property may be considered a defect for the purposes of laws similar to the one under review in this case (see, Bimstein v. Levine, 129 A.D.2d 757; Rehfuss v. City of Albany, 118 A.D.2d 987; Fein v. City of Long Beach, 123 A.D.2d 662). Such notice laws may be applied to dangerous conditions related to the placement of fixtures or appurtenances on municipal property (see, Shaw v City of Auburn, 59 N.Y.2d 780, affg 91 A.D.2d 817 for reasons stated at the App. Div. [plaintiff tripped over depressed manhold cover]; see also, Pittel v. Town of Hempstead, 154 A.D.2d 581 [pavement over fuel oil pipe fitting]; Bimstein v. Levine, supra [water pipe]; Zigman v. Town of Hempstead, 120 A.D.2d 520, 521 [sewer fixture curb]; Freeman v. County of Nassau, 95 A.D.2d 363 [sign stanchion]).