Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Teresa LEON, plaintiff-respondent, v. JOSEPH L. BALKAN INCORPORATED, appellant, Sutton Street Realty Corp., et al., defendants-respondents. (and a third-party action).
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Joseph L. Balkan Incorporated appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), dated July 15, 2005, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiff.
The plaintiff fell and was injured on a depressed and/or missing portion of sidewalk. It is undisputed that the appellant, Joseph L. Balkan Incorporated, had previously performed work in that area, including the removal of a portion of the sidewalk, to install water and sewer pipes. The appellant failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572; Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642). The evidence submitted with its moving papers was insufficient to demonstrate that it had properly repaired and restored the sidewalk before the plaintiff's accident or that the defective condition was caused and/or created by other entities (see Lau v. City of New York, 22 A.D.3d 529, 802 N.Y.S.2d 254; Adler v. Suffolk County Water Auth., 306 A.D.2d 229, 760 N.Y.S.2d 523; Atiles v. City of New York, 279 A.D.2d 543, 719 N.Y.S.2d 611). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion for summary judgment.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 02, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)