Legal Opinion
Castillo v. New York City Transit Authority
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 19, 2010PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The evidence submitted by defendants was insufficient to establish as a matter of law that plaintiff solely caused his accident in this slip-and-fall matter or that defendants did not create the alleged water-and-debris hazard and lacked actual or constructive notice of it. Not only did defendants fail to offer specific evidence as to their activities on the day of the accident, but the defendant church acknowledged that it maintained and cleaned the premises daily, with the exception of Sundays, the day the accident occurred (Lebron v Napa Realty Corp., 65 AD3d 436 [2009]; Moser v BP/CG Ctr.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- S. J. Capelin Associates, Inc. v. Globe Manufacturing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Lebron v. Napa Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Baptiste v. 1626 Meat Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sabalza v. SalgadoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Lopez v. New York Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Torres v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Brown v. Parrocks AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011