Legal Opinion
Iwelu v. New York City Transit AuThority
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 13, 2011PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*713A landowner has a duty to maintain his or her premises in a reasonably safe manner (see Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241 [1976]). However, he or she has no duty to protect or warn against an open and obvious condition, which as a matter of law is not inherently dangerous (see Cupo v Karfunkel, 1 AD3d 48, 52 [2003]).
Here, the Transit Authority established, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence, inter alia, in the form of expert affidavits and photographs of the accident scene, showing that the aspect of the riser which allegedly caused the plaintiff…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Basso v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Cupo v. KarfunkelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Curran v. EspositoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Outlaw v. Citibank, N.A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Grob v. Kings Realty AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Y.H. v. Town of OssiningAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Distefano v. Ulta SalonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Moseley v. Philip Howard Apartments Tenants Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Valenzuela v. Metro Motel, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- Y.H. v. Town of OssiningAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012