From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gardner v. County of Monroe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 4, 1998
247 A.D.2d 865 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

February 4, 1998

Present — Denman, P.J., Lawton, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion and cross motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting the motion and cross motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The record contains evidence that defendants had actual notice of a recurrent dangerous condition involving missing or dislodged drain hole covers, and plaintiff testified at her deposition that an employee of defendant APCOA, Inc., was aware of uncovered holes in the area where plaintiff fell and told her that he had fallen in one of the holes before her accident. Thus, there is an issue of fact with respect to constructive notice ( see, Camizzi v. Tops, Inc., 244 A.D.2d 1002; Gutz v. County of Monroe, 221 A.D.2d 838). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Siragusa, J. — Summary Judgment.)


Summaries of

Gardner v. County of Monroe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 4, 1998
247 A.D.2d 865 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Gardner v. County of Monroe

Case Details

Full title:NANCY A. GARDNER, Appellant, v. COUNTY OF MONROE et al., Respondents…

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

Date published: Feb 4, 1998

Citations

247 A.D.2d 865 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
668 N.Y.S.2d 818