Legal Opinion

Zaritsky v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 12, 1998PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered on or about September 18, 1996, which, inter alia, granted defendant Masto Realty Corp.’s motion and defendant City of New York’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The grant of both the motion and cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was proper. After having reviewed the relevant circumstances, the motion court concluded that the sidewalk defect to which plaintiff attributes her fall was trivial and possessed none of the characteristics…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Trincere v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
  2. Amatulli v. Delhi Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
  3. In re VitelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Tesak v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  2. Belmonte v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  3. Thomas v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  4. Wallace v. Riverbay Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API