From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 2, 1998
251 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 2, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.).


We agree with the motion court that the danger potentially posed by the stairway defect alleged by plaintiff to be the cause of her injury is of sufficient magnitude to raise a triable issue as to whether a dangerous or defective condition in fact existed (cf., Trincere v. County of Suffolk, 90 N.Y.2d 976). There was, in addition, sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue as to whether defendant had constructive notice of that defect, since plaintiff and her daughter both testified that they had observed the defect some six months prior to plaintiff's accident. We note in this connection that the claimed defect, involving the erosion of concrete from underneath the outer metal stripping of a step, was not transient in nature (see, e.g., Piacquadio v. Recine Realty Corp., 84 N.Y.2d 967).

Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Tom, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.


Summaries of

Moore v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 2, 1998
251 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Moore v. New York City Housing Authority

Case Details

Full title:ROSEMARY MOORE, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 2, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
672 N.Y.S.2d 712

Citing Cases

Scala v. Port Jefferson Free Library

The defendant's submissions in support of its motion for summary judgment merely demonstrated that it had no…

Nin v. Bernard

Upon consideration of these factors., we cannot conclude that the defect was trivial as a matter of law. The…