Dominguez v. OCG, IV, LLC
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Appellant failed to demonstrate its entitlement to summary judgment since it did not establish that the defect in the subject step was trivial as a matter of law. Whether a defect in a sidewalk or step is trivial is generally a matter for a jury, and “a mechanistic disposition of a case based exclusively on the dimension of the . . . defect is unacceptable” (Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976, 977-978 [1997]). Appellant relied on photographs of the step to establish that the defect was trivial, but the photographs show an irregular, patched and worn surface, which is not inconsistent…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Trincere v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Nin v. BernardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Tineo v. Parkchester South CondominiumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Wheeler v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
3Cited by3 opinions
- Flanders v. Sedgwick Avenue Associates, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Scelzo v. Acklinis Realty Holding LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Scelzo v. Acklinis Realty Holding LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012