From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Santello v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 29, 1995
222 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

December 29, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernstein, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, the appellants' motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed insofar as it is asserted against them.

In November 1993, the plaintiff Leo Santello allegedly sustained injuries when he tripped and fell on a public sidewalk located in front of the premises owned by the appellants Howard Babbush and Marilyn Babbush. The injured plaintiff and his wife then commenced this personal injury action against the City of New York and the appellants. After issue was joined, the appellants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action against them. The Supreme Court denied the motion. We now reverse.

Since the complaint failed to allege that the appellants actually created the sidewalk defect (see, Kobet v Consolidated Edison Co., 176 A.D.2d 785), that the sidewalk was constructed in a special manner for the appellants' benefit (see, Holz v Rinacente Props., 197 A.D.2d 669), or that there is a statute, ordinance, or municipal charter specifically charging the abutting landowner with a duty to maintain and repair the sidewalk and providing for liability if a breach of that duty occurs (see, Parker v Singer, 202 A.D.2d 409), the plaintiffs failed to allege any facts on which the appellants could be held liable. Accordingly, the appellants' motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them for failure to state a cause of action should have been granted. Sullivan, J.P., Thompson, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Santello v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 29, 1995
222 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Santello v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:LEO SANTELLO et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant, and…

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

Date published: Dec 29, 1995

Citations

222 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
636 N.Y.S.2d 69

Citing Cases

Oquendo v. City of New York

The motion of the respondents for summary judgment was properly granted. It is well established that an owner…

Iadarola v. CV Buildings, Inc.

Counsel argues that in the instant case there is no evidence in the record which establishes that CV's snow…