From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meehan v. County of Nassau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 1997
239 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 5, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff was injured when he stumbled and fell due to a depression in a sidewalk on Merrick Road in Valley Stream. The area at which the plaintiff fell had previously contained a tree that had been planted by the County in 1979 as part of a beautification program, which had been knocked down by a car and removed sometime prior to the plaintiff's accident. On appeal, the defendant County of Nassau contends, inter alia, that the court should have dismissed the action due to the plaintiff's failure to provide proof of prior written notice of the defect in the sidewalk as required by Nassau County Administrative Code § 12-4.0 (e). We agree.

Nassau County Administrative Code § 12-4.0 (e) provides that no civil action may be maintained against the County of Nassau for injuries resulting from a defective condition of any sidewalk unless the County had received prior written notice of that condition. Here, it is undisputed that the County did not receive prior written notice of the condition which allegedly caused the plaintiff's injuries. Moreover, there is nothing in the record establishing that the County affirmatively created the defect ( see, Zash v. County of Nassau, 171 A.D.2d 743; see also, Zizzo v. City of New York, 176 A.D.2d 722; Michela v County of Nassau, 176 A.D.2d 707; Real v. Town of Huntington, 175 A.D.2d 116).

We further reject the plaintiff's contention that the Nassau County Administrative Code is not applicable to trees, and therefore no notice of defect was required. The plaintiff's accident was clearly caused by a depression in the sidewalk, which falls within the ambit of the statute. Accordingly, the court should have dismissed the complaint.

In light of our determination, we need not address the parties' remaining contentions.

Mangano, P.J., Joy, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Meehan v. County of Nassau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 1997
239 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Meehan v. County of Nassau

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH F. MEEHAN, Respondent, v. COUNTY OF NASSAU, Appellant

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

Date published: May 5, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
657 N.Y.S.2d 987

Citing Cases

Mirabella v. City of New York

This section, more commonly known as the "pothole law", limits the City's liability for roadway defects to…