From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stern v. Incorporated Village of Flower Hill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 6, 2000
278 A.D.2d 225 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted November 8, 2000.

December 6, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), dated January 31, 2000, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) a judgment of the same court, entered March 3, 2000, which dismissed the complaint.

Tassan Pugatch Nikolis, Garden City, N.Y. (Philip P. Nikolis and Leonard J. Pugatch of counsel), for appellants.

Curtis, Vasile, Devine McElhenny, Merrick, N.Y. (Robert M. Smith of counsel), for respondent.

Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the defendant is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501[a][1]).

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant established that it did not receive the requisite prior written notice of the allegedly defective condition, and there was no evidence that the defendant affirmatively created the condition (see, Butts v. Village of Sag Harbor, 260 A.D.2d 419; ITT Hartford Ins. Co. v. Village of Ossining, 257 A.D.2d 606; Bess v. Village of E. Hampton, 225 A.D.2d 511). The injured plaintiff's assertion that the defendant created the defect over which she allegedly tripped when it paved the road is without any evidentiary foundation and was purely speculative. Therefore, her allegations were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Amarante v. Village of Tarrytown, 226 A.D.2d 488; Mendes v. Whitney-Floral Realty Corp., 216 A.D.2d 540).


Summaries of

Stern v. Incorporated Village of Flower Hill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 6, 2000
278 A.D.2d 225 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Stern v. Incorporated Village of Flower Hill

Case Details

Full title:ELLEN STERN, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF FLOWER HILL…

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

Date published: Dec 6, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 225 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
716 N.Y.S.2d 918

Citing Cases

Skates v. City of New York

The City of New York established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that it…

Regan v. City of New York

The appellant met its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see…