From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mendoza v. One Fordham Plaza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 12, 2011
84 A.D.3d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 4783.

May 12, 2011.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered February 17, 2010, which, in this action for personal injuries, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed on the law, without costs.

Steve S. Efron, New York, for appellant.

Smith Mazure Director Wilkins Young Yagerman, P.C., New York (Louise M. Cherkis of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, DeGrasse and Román, JJ.


Plaintiff has raised questions of fact regarding whether the defective condition involves more than just a height differential between the sidewalk flags, namely an overly and improperly sloped sidewalk, and thus we cannot conclude that the defect is trivial as a matter of law ( Cela v Goodyear Tire Rubber Co., 286 AD2d 640, 641; Nin v Bernard, 257 AD2d 417, 417-418).

The evidence also raised an issue of fact as to whether the defective condition existed for a sufficient length of time prior to the accident so as to permit defendants to discover and remedy it ( Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837).


Summaries of

Mendoza v. One Fordham Plaza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 12, 2011
84 A.D.3d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Mendoza v. One Fordham Plaza

Case Details

Full title:MARTHA MENDOZA, Appellant, v. ONE FORDHAM PLAZA, LLC, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: May 12, 2011

Citations

84 A.D.3d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3978
922 N.Y.S.2d 776

Citing Cases

Manko v. Dormitory Auth. of the State of N.Y.

The testimonial and photographic evidence reveal that the design of the base stone plinth created an uneven…