From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tosov v. C B Venture Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 1999
261 A.D.2d 535 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

May 17, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.).


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

Assuming the truth of the plaintiff's allegations regarding the manner in which the accident occurred, it is nevertheless clear that, after the appellant made out a prima facie case for summary judgment, she failed to come forward with any evidence indicating that the appellant's efforts to clear the sidewalk of snow and ice rendered the condition of the sidewalk more hazardous. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the appellant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it ( see, Verdino v. Alexandrou, 253 A.D.2d 553; Oley v. Village of Massapequa Park, 198 A.D.2d 272).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Schmidt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tosov v. C B Venture Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 1999
261 A.D.2d 535 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Tosov v. C B Venture Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ARELIS TOSOV, Respondent, v. C B VENTURE CORP., Defendant, and SHABAZ…

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

Date published: May 17, 1999

Citations

261 A.D.2d 535 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
690 N.Y.S.2d 627

Citing Cases

Vergara v. City of New York

RED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and…

Palopoli v. City of New York

see Taylor v. New York City Tr. Auth., 266 A.D.2d 384). Moreover, the plaintiffs' assertion that the injured…