Mandel v. City of New York
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff’s proof, viewed in its most favorable light, fails to disclose that under the circumstances present here, the City of New York was negligent in permitting the extraordinary snowfall to exist for an unreasonable period of time or that it had a reasonable opportunity to remedy the condition (Reutlinger v City of New York, 281 NY 592; Schlausky v City of New York, 41 AD2d 156, 158). Nor was there adequate proof adduced at trial from which a jury could impose liability on defendant landlord…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Reutlinger v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Schlausky v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
- Cardoza v. SheinerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969