Arcuri v. Vitolo

Decision Date09 August 1993
Citation601 N.Y.S.2d 173,196 A.D.2d 519
PartiesGloria ARCURI, et al., Respondents, v. Robert VITOLO, et al., Defendants-Appellants, John P. Schwinning, et al., Third-Party Defendants-Appellants, et al., Third-Party Defendants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Bunnin & DiGiulio, New York City (Sheldon Bunnin, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Robert Vitolo.

William A. Dubrowski, Staten Island, for defendant third-party defendant-appellant John P. Schwinning.

Lifshutz & Polland, P.C., New York City (Elliot R. Polland, of counsel), for defendant third-party defendant-appellant George S. El Frezli.

Paganini & Herling, New York City (Deborah Jakes and Anthony J. Pirrotti, Jr., of counsel), for third-party defendants-appellants Michael A. Marino and Cheryl Hahn Marino.

Fitzgerald & Fitzgerald, P.C., Yonkers (Nathan M. Belofsky, of counsel), for plaintiffs-respondents.

Before MANGANO, P.J., and ROSENBLATT, O'BRIEN and COPERTINO, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants and the third-party defendants separately appeal from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Amann, J.), dated June 20, 1991, which, inter alia, denied the motion of the defendant Robert Vitolo for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against him and the separate motion of the third-party defendants Michael Marino and Cheryl Marino, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims in their entireties.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs to the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs, the motions are granted, and the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed in their entireties.

The plaintiff Gloria Arcuri was injured on November 11, 1987, at approximately 7:40 A.M., when she slipped and fell on snow and ice in front of an office in Staten Island where she was employed. The plaintiffs commenced the instant action against several defendants, including the defendant Robert Vitolo, who owned the property in question.

At her examination before trial, the injured plaintiff admitted that it was not snowing the day before the accident, and that the snow and ice which she observed on November 11, 1987, upon awakening at 6:30 A.M., must have fallen during the night and early morning of November 10, to November 11, 1987, while she was sleeping. Moreover, a weather report for Newark Airport, not far west of the accident site, which was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • Olejniczak v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 96-CV-81A.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • February 19, 1998
    ...*2 (N.D.N.Y. November 21, 1995); Hammond-Warner v. United States, 797 F.Supp. 207, 210-11 (E.D.N.Y.1992); Arcuri v. Vitolo, 196 A.D.2d 519, 520, 601 N.Y.S.2d 173, 174 (2nd Dept.1993); Porcari v. S.E.M. Management Corp., 184 A.D.2d 556, 557, 584 N.Y.S.2d 331, 332 (2d Dept.1992). In the case ......
  • Simmons v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • August 18, 1994
    ...owner has had a reasonably sufficient time from the end of the storm to remedy the condition caused by the elements (Arcuri v. Vitolo, 196 A.D.2d 519, 520, 601 N.Y.S.2d 173). We conclude herein that under the circumstances any condition existing on the date and at the time of this incident ......
  • Xiao H. Lin v. Farrington Arms Condo. All Area Realty Servs.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • May 7, 2020
    ...[2d Dept. 2005]; Dowden v. Long Is. R.R., 305 A.D.2d 631, 759 N.Y.S.2d 544; Whitt v St. John's Episcopal Hosp., supra; Arcuri v. Vitolo, 196 A.D.2d 519 [2d Dept. 1993]). The plaintiff failed to provide evidence in opposition sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the moti......
  • Xiao H. Lin v. Farrington Arms Condo. All Area Realty Servs.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • May 7, 2020
    ...[2d Dept. 2005]; Dowden v. Long Is. R.R., 305 A.D.2d 631, 759 N.Y.S.2d 544; Whitt v St. John's Episcopal Hosp., supra; Arcuri v. Vitolo, 196 A.D.2d 519 [2d Dept. 1993]). The plaintiff failed to provide evidence in opposition sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the moti......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT