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.
Eneido PINON, et al., Appellants, v. TOWN OF ISLIP, et al., Respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Henry, J.), entered October 31, 1997, which granted the defendants' separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The plaintiff Eneido Pinon was allegedly injured when he tripped over a curb box protruding approximately one to four inches from the sidewalk. He and his wife subsequently commenced this action against the Town of Islip and the Suffolk County Water Authority. After completion of discovery, the defendants separately moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
The defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition to their motions, the plaintiffs failed to come forward with evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendants created the allegedly defective condition (see, Delano v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., 231 A.D.2d 671, 647 N.Y.S.2d 849; Fazio v. Town of Mamaroneck, 226 A.D.2d 338, 640 N.Y.S.2d 216), or had actual or constructive notice of any defect (see, Town Law § 65-a; Charbonneau v. City of Cohoes, 232 A.D.2d 931, 648 N.Y.S.2d 836). Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the Town did not derive a special benefit from the curb box which would obviate the notice requirement (see, Charbonneau v. City of Cohoes, supra). Consequently, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: November 30, 1998
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)