Heiden v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the table wheel upon which the plaintiff tripped and fell was open and obvious, and not inherently dangerous (see Mastellone v City of New York, 29 AD3d 540 [2006]; Swan v Eastman Kodak Co., 16 AD3d 1098, 1099 [2005]; Hecht v 281 Scarsdale Corp., 3 AD3d 551, 552 [2004]; Cupo v Karfunkel, 1 AD3d 48 [2003]; Sorce v Great Oak Mar., 282 AD2d 598, 599 [2001]). In response, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact sufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment (see…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Cupo v. KarfunkelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Hecht v. 281 Scarsdale Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Mastellone v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Sorce v. Great Oak MarinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.