Opinion
No. 2022-06439 Index No. 1545/16
08-21-2024
Bettina Hornung, appellant, v. City of New York, et al., respondents.
Nguyen Leftt, P.C., New York, NY (Stephen D. Chakwin, Jr., of counsel), for appellant. Sobel Pevzner, LLC, New York, NY (Oliver W. Williams of counsel), for respondents.
Nguyen Leftt, P.C., New York, NY (Stephen D. Chakwin, Jr., of counsel), for appellant.
Sobel Pevzner, LLC, New York, NY (Oliver W. Williams of counsel), for respondents.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P. PAUL WOOTEN HELEN VOUTSINAS LOURDES M. VENTURA, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Debra Silber, J.), dated August 4, 2022. The order granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendants to recover damages for injuries she allegedly sustained when she climbed a fence on premises owned by the defendants and caught her hand on a wire protruding from the fence. The plaintiff alleged, inter alia, that the defendants were negligent in that they failed to maintain the fence in a safe condition. The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. In an order dated August 4, 2022, the Supreme Court granted the motion. The plaintiff appeals.
Landowners have a duty to maintain their premises in a reasonably safe condition to prevent foreseeable injuries (see Basso v Miller, 40 N.Y.2d 233, 241; Alkon v North Shore Towers Apts. Inc., 185 A.D.3d 765, 766). The scope of such duty is determined "in view of all the circumstances, including the likelihood of injury to others, the seriousness of the injury, and the burden of avoiding the risk" (Basso v Miller, 40 N.Y.2d at 241; see Sweet v Hazan, 220 A.D.3d 666, 667).
Here, the defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that they maintained the fence in a reasonably safe condition in view of all the circumstances (see Basso v Miller, 40 N.Y.2d at 241). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
DUFFY, J.P., WOOTEN, VOUTSINAS and VENTURA, JJ., concur.