Fusco v. City of Rome

Full title: DENISE FUSCO, Appellant, v. CITY OF ROME, Respondent

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

Date published: Feb 7, 1997

236 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

653 N.Y.S.2d 891

Opinion

February 7, 1997.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Pine, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

Memorandum:

In support of its motion for summary judgment, defendant submitted proof in evidentiary form that it had not received notice of the dangerous or defective condition that caused plaintiffs injury. Plaintiffs submissions in opposition to the motion failed to raise a question of fact on that issue and failed to include proof in evidentiary form that defendant's affirmative acts of negligence created the dangerous or defective condition ( see, Zigman v Town of Hempstead, 120 AD2d 520, 521). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Shaheen, J. — Summary Judgment.)