From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hogan v. Baker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 16, 2006
29 A.D.3d 740 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

2003-04221.

May 16, 2006.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated April 8, 2003, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

White McSpedon, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Steven G. Fauth, Brian C. McSharry, and James Aldag of counsel), for appellant.

Keegan Keegan, LLP, Patchogue, N.Y. (Jamie G. Rosner of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Florio, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Lifson, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff's decedent was walking on the defendant's unpaved driveway when one of the rocks in the driveway caused her to fall. The defendant allegedly placed rocks in the driveway several years before the accident, to serve as the base of the driveway before it was paved, but never paved the driveway.

The defendant failed to establish her prima facie entitlement to summary judgment since she did not show that she met her duty as a property owner to maintain her premises in a reasonably safe manner ( see Basso v. Miller, 40 NY2d 233; Tulovic v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 309 AD2d 923). Additionally, the alleged open and obvious nature of the condition only raised a triable issue of fact as to the comparative fault of the plaintiff's decedent ( see Cupo v. Karfunkel, 1 AD3d 48).


Summaries of

Hogan v. Baker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 16, 2006
29 A.D.3d 740 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Hogan v. Baker

Case Details

Full title:DEAN M. HOGAN, Respondent, v. JEANNIE BAKER, Appellant

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

Date published: May 16, 2006

Citations

29 A.D.3d 740 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3845
815 N.Y.S.2d 245

Citing Cases

Boston v. City of New York

Charosa failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law as it did not…

Pera v. Lopez

Accordingly, they are not entitled to summary judgment. See Hogan v. Baker, 29 A.D.3d 740 (2d Dep't 2006)…