Legal Opinion
Gibbons v. City of New York
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided October 9, 1951PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFitzpatrick, J.
Under the authority of Osterhout v. Town of Bethlehem (55 App. Div. 198) the court will hold as a matter of law that knowledge in this case will mean the existence of the defect for a substantial period of time during which in the exercise of due care the city could have obtained the necessary knowledge. The only question remaining is whether they can infer such a sufficient period of time from the photographs that were admitted in evidence, the supporting testimony of the plaintiff under which the picture was introduced giving no hint or proof of any particular period of time.
Biehardson on…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. . WebsterNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Cowley v. . People of the State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Knihal v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
- Osterhout v. Town of BethlehemAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mamie McDermot and John F. McDermot v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- City of Jacksonville v. HamptonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959
- Valle v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Shapiro v. Hotel Corp. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1966