From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reinoso v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 26, 2001
288 A.D.2d 455 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

2001-02136

Submitted November 7, 2001.

November 26, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Joseph Robles appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), dated January 8, 2001, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

Sobel, Ross, Fliegel Suss, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Slavko Ristich of counsel), for appellant.

Koval Rejtig Dean, PLLC, Garden City, N.Y. (Michael T. Savelli of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.

The plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell on a black bag on the sidewalk in front of premises owned by the appellant, thereby sustaining personal injuries.

The owner or the lessee of land abutting a public sidewalk owes no duty to keep the sidewalk in a safe condition (see, Hausser v. Giunta, 88 N.Y.2d 449; Ritts v. Teslenko, 276 A.D.2d 768). However, the abutting landowner or lessee may be held liable where he creates a hazardous condition on the sidewalk (see, Ritts v. Teslenko, supra). In the case at bar, any claim on the part of the plaintiff that the appellant created the allegedly hazardous condition was based on mere speculation (see, Frankie v. Glen Cove Hous. Auth., 276 A.D.2d 668). Therefore, the appellant's motion for summary judgment should have been granted.

RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, FRIEDMANN, FEUERSTEIN and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Reinoso v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 26, 2001
288 A.D.2d 455 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Reinoso v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:LUZ M. REINOSO, respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, defendant, JOSEPH ROBLES…

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

Date published: Nov 26, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 455 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
733 N.Y.S.2d 130

Citing Cases

Baumgarten v. 1071-1081 Brighton Realty, Inc.

In the instant case, the record does not contain any evidence that EFE or Brighton had actual notice of the…

Skolnik v. City of New York

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs, the motion…