Legal Opinion

Ward v. City of New York

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

Decided November 15, 2011PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

At trial, plaintiffs counsel unequivocally stated that the sole theory of recovery upon which plaintiffs claims were premised was that of prior written notice to the City. Therefore, plaintiff waived affirmative negligence as a theory of liability, and her arguments pertaining thereto are not preserved for review (see Spierer v Bloomingdale’s, 44 AD3d 336 [2007]).

Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion by denying plaintiffs motion to reopen.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unpersuasive. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Catterson, Moskowitz, Renwick and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Spierer v. Bloomingdale'sAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Seller v. Citimortgage, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  2. Seller v. Citimortgage, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API