From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morales v. Riverbay Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 25, 1996
226 A.D.2d 271 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Summary

holding one-inch level difference in sidewalk, standing alone, not actionable

Summary of this case from Cornelisse v. United States

Opinion

April 25, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.).


Plaintiff was allegedly injured when she tripped on a sidewalk in Coop City, which is owned and operated by defendant Riverbay Corporation. Plaintiff testified that the sidewalk was not level, with a displacement of "[a]bout an inch."

It is settled that "[t]he owner of a public passageway may not be cast in damages for negligent maintenance by reason of trivial defects on a walkway, not constituting a trap or nuisance, as a consequence of which a pedestrian might merely stumble, stub his toes, or trip over a raised projection" ( Liebl v. Metropolitan Jockey Club, 10 A.D.2d 1006; Guerrieri v. Summa, 193 A.D.2d 647; Hecht v. City of New York, 89 A.D.2d 524, mod on other grounds 60 N.Y.2d 57; Mascaro v. State of New York, 46 A.D.2d 941, affd 38 N.Y.2d 870). Further, differences in elevation of about one inch, without more, have been held to be nonactionable ( Hecht v. City of New York, supra; Mascaro v. State of New York, supra; Allen v Carr, 28 A.D.2d 155, affd 22 N.Y.2d 924).

In the matter at bar, the differential between the two slabs was, by plaintiff's own testimony, about an inch and possessed none of the characteristics of a trap or a snare.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Morales v. Riverbay Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 25, 1996
226 A.D.2d 271 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

holding one-inch level difference in sidewalk, standing alone, not actionable

Summary of this case from Cornelisse v. United States

granting defendant summary judgment on the one-inch sidewalk projection

Summary of this case from Stubis v. Port Auth. of N.Y. N.J.

In Morales, the court held that the owner corporation was not liable for a pedestrian's injuries allegedly sustained when she tripped on a sidewalk with a one inch differential between two slabs.

Summary of this case from Robinson v. Cambridge Realty Co., LLC

In Morales, and Riser, the court held that a height differential between the sidewalk and a tree grate of three-quarters of an inch was trivial as a mater of law. Morales v. Riverbay Corporation, 226 AD2d 271 (2nd Dept 1996); Riser v. New York City Housing Authority, 260 AD2d 564 (2nd Dept 1999).

Summary of this case from Ochoa v. Walton Mgt. LLC
Case details for

Morales v. Riverbay Corporation

Case Details

Full title:LILLIAN MORALES, Respondent, v. RIVERBAY CORPORATION, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 25, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 271 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
641 N.Y.S.2d 276

Citing Cases

Ochoa v. Walton Mgt. LLC

Tricere v. County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976 (1997); Bullock v. Anthony Equities, Ltd. , 12 AD3d 326 (1st Dept.…

Watkins v. Forsyth

However, "trivial defects on a walkway not constituting, a trap or nuisance, as a consequence of which a…