Di Sanza v. City of New York
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. We agree with the majority at the Appellate Division that, under the particular circumstances of this case, defendant Consolidated Edison Company of New York’s evidentiary submissions were sufficient to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the ground that it neither created nor had actual or constructive notice of the one-inch bulge in the sidewalk grating. We further conclude that plaintiffs introduction of the postaccident photographs, which were not probative…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Diaz v. New York Downtown HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Romano v. StanleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Batton v. ElghanayanNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
3Cited by9 opinions
- Decker v. SchildtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Azzaro v. Super 8 Motels, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Loughren v. County of UlsterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Champagne v. PeckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Roimesher v. Colgate Scaffolding & Equipment Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.