Miller v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
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.
Defendant CSX was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint because plaintiff failed to raise a triable question of fact on the issue of whether CSX breached a duty of care it owed plaintiff as owner of the railroad yard where plaintiff was injured. Absent a hazardous condition or other circumstance giving rise to an obligation to provide exterior lighting for a particular area, landowners are generally not required “to illuminate their property during all hours of darkness” (Peralta…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Peralta v. HenriquezNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
3Cited by10 opinions
- Rossal-Daub v. WalterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Taylor v. Lands End Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Revesz v. CareyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Hyer v. FullerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Saravo-Schectman v. PinchbackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.