Springer v. Wash. Mut. Bank
| Decision Date | 26 February 2014 |
| Citation | 980 N.Y.S.2d 820,114 A.D.3d 928,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 01311 |
| Parties | Asnet SPRINGER, respondent, v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, et al., appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Cullen and Dykman, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Wendy Tobias and Eliza M. Pugliese of counsel), for appellants.
Phillips, Krantz & Associates, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Heath T. Buzin of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated May 24, 2012, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. A landowner or lessee has a duty to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe manner ( see Peralta v. Henriquez, 100 N.Y.2d 139, 760 N.Y.S.2d 741, 790 N.E.2d 1170;Basso v. Miller, 40 N.Y.2d 233, 386 N.Y.S.2d 564, 352 N.E.2d 868). Liability can be imposed upon a landowner or a lessee who creates a dangerous condition on the property, or had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition ( see Sanchez v. 1710 Broadway, Inc., 79 A.D.3d 845, 846, 915 N.Y.S.2d 272;Gover v. Mastic Beach Prop. Owners Assn., 57 A.D.3d 729, 730, 869 N.Y.S.2d 593). The defendants, who were lessees of the premises at which the subject accident occurred, failed to demonstrate their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law since they did not present evidence showing that they did not create, or have actual or constructive notice of, the allegedly dangerous condition that caused the plaintiff's injuries. Thus, the defendants did not establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and we need not consider the sufficiency of the plaintiff's opposition to the motion ( see Bocelli v. County of Nassau, 93 A.D.3d 747, 940 N.Y.S.2d 660;Rosenbaum v. Bayis Ne ‘Emon, Inc., 32 A.D.3d 534, 820 N.Y.S.2d 326).
In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the plaintiff's remaining contention.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Quiroz v. 176 N. Main, LLC
...Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 837, 501 N.Y.S.2d 646, 492 N.E.2d 774; see also Springer v. Washington Mut. Bank, 114 A.D.3d 928, 929, 980 N.Y.S.2d 820). “To establish a prima facie case of negligence based wholly on circumstantial evidence, ‘[i]t is enough that......
-
Quiroz v. 176 N. Main, LLC
...v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 837, 501 N.Y.S.2d 646, 492 N.E.2d 774 ; see also Springer v. Washington Mut. Bank, 114 A.D.3d 928, 929, 980 N.Y.S.2d 820 ). “To establish a prima facie case of negligence based wholly on circumstantial evidence, ‘[i]t is enough that [the......
-
Koutsiaftis v. Alliance Parking Servs., LLC
...a dangerous condition on the property, or had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition" ( Springer v. Washington Mut. Bank, 114 A.D.3d 928, 929, 980 N.Y.S.2d 820 ; see Sanchez v. 1710 Broadway, Inc., 79 A.D.3d 845, 846, 915 N.Y.S.2d 272 ). "To constitute constructive notice,......
- People v. Bridges