From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meltzer v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 5, 1989
156 A.D.2d 124 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Summary

In Meltzer v City of New York (156 AD2d 124), the plaintiff tripped on a projecting gas valve housing on a Manhattan street.

Summary of this case from Tucker v. N.Y

Opinion

December 5, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.).


In this personal injury action brought by plaintiff, who tripped on a Manhattan street over a projecting gas valve housing installed by defendant Consolidated Edison, the city sought dismissal of the complaint for lack of prior notice of the street condition pursuant to the New York City "Pothole Law" (formerly Administrative Code of City of New York § 394a-1.0 [d] [2], now § 7-201 [c] [2]). We agree with the IAS court that the minor street defect was an "encumbrance" or "attachment" covered by the statute (Shaw v City of Auburn, 91 A.D.2d 817, affd for reasons stated below 59 N.Y.2d 780). Further, none of the street opening or work permits issued in and around the area provided the necessary notice to the city. The city presented a prima facie case for summary judgment, and the plaintiff failed to provide evidentiary facts showing a triable issue of fact (Capelin Assocs. v Globe Mfg. Corp., 34 N.Y.2d 338). None of the several documents produced demonstrated that plaintiff or anyone else had given notice of the particular defect causing her injuries.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Milonas, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Meltzer v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 5, 1989
156 A.D.2d 124 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

In Meltzer v City of New York (156 AD2d 124), the plaintiff tripped on a projecting gas valve housing on a Manhattan street.

Summary of this case from Tucker v. N.Y
Case details for

Meltzer v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:ETHEL MELTZER, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents. (And…

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

Date published: Dec 5, 1989

Citations

156 A.D.2d 124 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
548 N.Y.S.2d 26

Citing Cases

Wright v. City of New York

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. The plaintiffs' action was properly dismissed because they…

Velazquez v. N.Y. City Transit Auth.

The City's attorney argues that a review of the records submitted with the two aforementioned affidavits…