Opinion
December 17, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.).
The motion was properly denied on the ground that triable issues of fact exist bearing upon whether defendants breached their duty to provide plaintiff with a safe place to alight, including whether defendants knew or should have known of the street pothole that allegedly caused plaintiff to trip and fall ( see, Blye v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 124 A.D.2d 106, 109, affd 72 N.Y.2d 888), and whether vehicular and pedestrian traffic blocked any safe alternative path around the pothole to the curb ( see, supra, at 110-111, comparing, inter alia, Rodriguez v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 117 A.D.2d 541, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 602, with Keener v. Tilton, 283 N.Y. 454). We note that defendants' claim that plaintiff negotiated her own path is supported only by their attorney's affirmation.
Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Williams, JJ.