From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

DeCurtis v. T. H. Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 28, 1997
241 A.D.2d 536 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

July 28, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.).


Ordered that the order is modified by deleting therefrom the provision which denied that branch of the appellant's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The appellant was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Although the appellant removed snow from the same parking lot in which the plaintiff fell five days before the plaintiff's accident, there is no evidence that an icy condition existed at the time the appellant removed snow from the parking lot or, even if there was, that the appellant was notified of it. In addition, there was no evidence concerning the origin of the ice upon which the plaintiff allegedly slipped (see, Simmons v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 84 N.Y.2d 972; Bertman v. Board of Mgrs., 233 A.D.2d 283; Denton v Klein Middle School, 234 A.D.2d 257).

Moreover, the appellant assumed no duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm to the plaintiff by virtue of its contractual duty to remove snow from the subject premises (see, Autrino v. Hausrath's Landscape Maintenance, 231 A.D.2d 943; Phillips v. Young Men's Christian Assn., 215 A.D.2d 825, 826; Bourk v. National Cleaning, 174 A.D.2d 827).

Mangano, P. J., Ritter, Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

DeCurtis v. T. H. Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 28, 1997
241 A.D.2d 536 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

DeCurtis v. T. H. Associates

Case Details

Full title:GAIL DeCURTIS, Respondent, v. T. H. ASSOCIATES et al., Defendants, and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 28, 1997

Citations

241 A.D.2d 536 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
661 N.Y.S.2d 642

Citing Cases

Otero v. City of New York

Nor was there sufficient proof that the City possessed constructive notice of the ice condition. The fact…

Henry v. Plotka

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all…