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.
Brenda Brown, plaintiff-respondent, v. City of New York, appellant, Soo Gil Cho, et al., defendants-respondents.
Argued—November 15, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant City of New York appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sherman, J.), dated February 25, 2011, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the defendant City of New York to the plaintiff.
On its motion for summary judgment in this action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant City of New York failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it. The City contended, inter alia, that the Big Apple Map for the area where the plaintiff fell did not provide it with prior written notice of the alleged defect that caused the plaintiff to fall.
Where, as here, “there are ‘factual disputes regarding the precise location of the defect that allegedly caused a plaintiff's fall, and whether the alleged defect is designated on the map, the question should be resolved by the jury’ ” (Bradley v. City of New York, 38 AD3d 581, 582, quoting Cassuto v. City of New York, 23 AD3d 423, 424; see Vertsberger v. City of New York, 34 AD3d 453, 455–456; Almadotter v. City of New York, 15 AD3d 426, 427; Quinn v. City of New York, 305 A.D.2d 570, 571).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the City's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.
In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties' remaining contention.
RIVERA, J.P., LEVENTHAL, ROMAN and SGROI, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 2011–04796 (Index No. 34164 /08)
Decided: December 06, 2011
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)