From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weekes v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 5, 1998
250 A.D.2d 354 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

May 5, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.).


Plaintiff's claim that it was error to submit to the jury the issue of whether the City had notice of the sidewalk defect that allegedly caused him to fall was not preserved by objection (CPLR 4110-b; see, Carrasquillo v. American Type Founders Co., 183 A.D.2d 410, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 703), and we decline to review the claim. In any event, it is without merit in view of the variance between plaintiff's testimony concerning the nature of the defect and the markings on the Big Apple map that plaintiff claims gave the City notice as a matter of law. Nor is the finding that the map did not give the City notice of the alleged defect against the weight of the evidence.

Concur — Lerner, P. J., Nardelli, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Weekes v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 5, 1998
250 A.D.2d 354 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Weekes v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:RAWLE WEEKES, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent

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

Date published: May 5, 1998

Citations

250 A.D.2d 354 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
672 N.Y.S.2d 683

Citing Cases

Prote Contracting v. Bd. of City of New York

Thus, in view of the dismissal of defendant's counterclaims, its claim for punitive damages should have been…