Legal Opinion
Krinsky v. Fortunato
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 1, 2011PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Dismissal of the complaint was warranted where plaintiffs fall occurred while a storm was in progress (see Solazzo v New York City Tr. Auth., 21 AD3d 735 [2005], affd 6 NY3d 734 [2005]). The climatological records of the day of plaintiffs accident showed a snowfall that resulted in a total accumulation of 2.8 inches (see Abaya v City of New York, 257 AD2d 446 [1999]). Even crediting plaintiffs testimony that the snow had completely stopped 30 to 45 minutes before her fall, such a short lapse of time is insufficient to impart liability on defendants (see Rodriguez v New York City Hous. Auth.,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Trincere v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Solazzo v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
- Solazzo v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Joseph v. Pitkin Carpet, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Disla v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Weinberger v. 52 Duane Associates, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Weinberger v. 52 Duane Associates, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013