From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Waner v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 25, 2004
5 A.D.3d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

3175.

Decided March 25, 2004.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Madden, J.), entered December 10, 2001, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Lisa M. Comeau, Plaintiff-Appellant.

Elizabeth I. Freedman, Defendant-Respondent.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Tom, Sullivan, Ellerin, Williams, JJ.


Inasmuch as defendant's prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law went unrebutted by plaintiff, the grant of summary judgment dismissing the complaint was proper ( see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324; Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853). The markings relied upon by plaintiff on the Big Apple Pothole and Sidewalk Protection Corporation map are insufficient to raise any triable issue as to whether defendant had notice of the particular hazard alleged ( see Camacho v. City of New York, 218 A.D.2d 725, 726).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Waner v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 25, 2004
5 A.D.3d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Waner v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:PAUL WANER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Mar 25, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
773 N.Y.S.2d 542

Citing Cases

Steinberg v. City of N.Y.

Id. Because the City must be put on notice of the particular condition at issue, "[t]he awareness of one…

Roldan v. City of New York

The last Big Apple map received by defendant City of New York prior to the accident noted that the sidewalk…