From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spiegel v. Vanguard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 10, 2008
50 A.D.3d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Summary

finding that a height differential of one inch between a carpeted area of the floor and the adjacent cement floor did not have any characteristics of a trap or snare and was not actionable

Summary of this case from Natijehbashem v. United States

Opinion

No. 3339.

April 10, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H, Lehner, J.), entered November 9, 2006, which granted defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Law Offices of Barry E. Schulman, Brooklyn (Barry E. Schulman of counsel), for appellant.

Law Offices of Charles J. Siegel, New York (Robert S. Cypher of counsel), for Vanguard Construction and Development Company, respondent.

Law Office of John P. Humphreys, New York (Scott M. Karpel of counsel), for 500-512 Seventh Avenue Associates and Helmsley-Spear, Inc., respondents.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez and Acosta, JJ.


The record establishes defendants' entitlement to summary judgment by demonstrating that the height differential of one inch between the carpeted area of the floor and the adjacent cement floor did not have any of the characteristics of a trap or snare, and was not actionable ( see Kwitny v Westchester Towers Owners Corp., 47 AD3d 495; Martin v Lafayette Morrison Hous. Corp., 31 AD3d 300; Morales v Riverbay Corp., 226 AD2d 271). No specificity of detail beyond the one-inch differential is presented here. Plaintiff testified that he was looking at the subject area when he fell. However, the photographs do not evidence a trap such as an edge posing a tripping hazard, or a situation where a defect might have been masked from view. Moreover, plaintiff is unable to establish that defendants 500-512 Seventh Avenue Associates, an out-of-possession landlord, and Helmsley-Spear, its managing agent, had actual or constructive notice of the alleged defect ( see Morchik v Trinity School, 257 AD2d 534, 536).


Summaries of

Spiegel v. Vanguard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 10, 2008
50 A.D.3d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

finding that a height differential of one inch between a carpeted area of the floor and the adjacent cement floor did not have any characteristics of a trap or snare and was not actionable

Summary of this case from Natijehbashem v. United States
Case details for

Spiegel v. Vanguard

Case Details

Full title:JAMES SPIEGEL, Appellant, v. VANGUARD CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY…

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

Date published: Apr 10, 2008

Citations

50 A.D.3d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 3121
860 N.Y.S.2d 11

Citing Cases

Togut v. Riverbay Corp.

Rather, it was "trivial" and did not constitute a "trap or snare", as required to attach landowner liability.…

Saglimbene v. CPF 1511 Third Ave.

In support of its motion, CPF 1511 argues that the alleged condition was trivial and thus not actionable,…