From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Almodovar v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

June 16, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

On December 30, 1990, the infant plaintiff was walking with his brother and his friend along 37th Street in Brooklyn. At one point, the infant plaintiff veered from the sidewalk and into the roadway, allegedly due to the presence of an accumulation of debris which rendered the sidewalk passable only with great difficulty. He was then struck by a vehicle driven by an unidentified motorist. In the ensuing personal injury action, the plaintiffs alleged, inter alia, that the respondent City of New York was negligent in allowing the sidewalk to become impassable.

Pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 7-201 (c) (2), the respondent City of New York is protected from the imposition of personal injury liability based on the "obstructed condition" of any sidewalk "unless it appears that written notice of the * * * obstructed condition was actually given to the commissioner of transportation [or other authorized person] * * * and there was a failure or neglect within fifteen days after the receipt of such notice to repair or remove the * * * obstruction complained of". On appeal, the plaintiff argues that such prior written notice was not required in this case, where the dangerous condition consisted of "debris on a sidewalk", and where such condition was "open and obvious". We disagree.

The prior written notice requirement set forth in Administrative Code § 7-201 (c) (2) explicitly encompasses dangerous conditions consisting of the obstruction of a sidewalk. There is no reason not to construe this language according to its literal meaning (see, Monteleone v. Incorporated Vil. of Floral Park, 74 N.Y.2d 917; Seymour v. City of New York, 235 A.D.2d 470; Lee v City of New York, 193 A.D.2d 787; King v. County of Warren, 178 A.D.2d 816). We therefore agree with the Supreme Court that Administrative Code § 7-201 (c) (2) applies to the facts of this case.

Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Thompson and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Almodovar v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Almodovar v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:PETER ALMODOVAR, an Infant, by GLADYS GUZMAN, as Parent and Natural…

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

Date published: Jun 16, 1997

Citations

240 A.D.2d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
658 N.Y.S.2d 446

Citing Cases

Woodard v. City of New York

Moreover, the unsworn affirmation of the plaintiffs' engineering expert did not constitute competent evidence…

Redding v. Heart of Catskill Ass'n, Inc.

(Boice v. City of Kingston, 60 AD3d 1140 [3d Dept. 2009]; Groninger v. Village of Mamaroneck, supra). On this…