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.
Andre M. AUGUSTIN, respondent, v. CS 87 ESTATES, LLC, et al., appellants.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Ulysses B. Leverett, J.), entered February 23, 2021. The order denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In November 2018, the plaintiff allegedly was injured when he tripped and fell on a sidewalk abutting the apartment complex where he resided in Hollis. At that time, the premises abutting the sidewalk where the accident occurred were owned by the defendants, CS 87 Estates, LLC, ML 188 Estates, LLC, and CS Jamaica Estates, LLC. The plaintiff commenced the instant action against the defendants to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained in the accident. The complaint alleged that the defendants were negligent in, among other things, maintaining the area where the plaintiff tripped and fell in a reasonably safe condition. Subsequently, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. In an order entered February 23, 2021, the Supreme Court denied the defendants’ motion. The defendants appeal.
“ ‘[A] landowner has a duty to exercise reasonable care in maintaining his [or her] own property in a reasonably safe condition under the circumstances’ ” (Siyunova v. 5420 Mgt. Corp., 203 AD3d 975, 976, quoting Galindo v. Town of Clarkstown, 2 NY3d 633, 636), and certain landowners of real property “abutting any sidewalk” in the City of New York have a duty to maintain a sidewalk in a reasonably safe condition (Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 7–210[b]).
Here, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, since there are triable issues of fact concerning, among other things, the precise location of the accident, and the defendants’ duty, if any, to the plaintiff (see Bonifacio v. El Paraiso Food Mkt., Inc., 109 AD3d 454, 455; Zayas v Half Hollow Hills Cent. School Dist., 226 A.D.2d 713, 714).
BARROS, J.P., MILLER, GENOVESI and WAN, JJ., concur.
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.
Docket No: 2021–01614
Decided: June 21, 2023
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)