From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sparks v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 31, 1968
31 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

December 31, 1968


Appeal by plaintiff from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered March 7, 1968, as is in favor of defendant City of New York against plaintiff upon the trial court's direction of a verdict in favor of defendants. Judgment reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, and new trial granted as between plaintiff and the City of New York, with costs to abide the event. No questions of fact were considered. We are of the opinion that the evidence adduced at the trial was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to plaintiff's contributory negligence and that it was error to direct a verdict in respondent's favor. Whalen v. Citizens' Gas Light Co. ( 151 N.Y. 70) is not to the contrary. Woolfolk v. Eisenberg (215 N.Y.S.2d 941) and Venia v. Bartel ( 11 Misc.2d 501) are not controlling, since the accidents therein did not occur on a public sidewalk, upon which a pedestrian may walk, indulging in a presumption that it is safe. Christ, Acting P.J., Brennan, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sparks v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 31, 1968
31 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

Sparks v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MAVIS SPARKS, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent, et al.…

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

Date published: Dec 31, 1968

Citations

31 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Citing Cases

Lowenstein v. Pomodoro Restaurant

a former employee and a participant in the accident who, having left his post guarding the open vault, had a…

Hawkins v. City of New York

However, the court failed to advise the jury of plaintiff's argument, which was amply supported by evidence…