From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Valient v. Rimland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 10, 1998
253 A.D.2d 463 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

August 10, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.).


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

The Supreme Court correctly found that there are issues of fact as to whether the appellant properly performed its ice-and snow-removal duties pursuant to the terms of its contract with the respondents (see, e.g., Phillips v. Young Men's Christian Assn., 215 A.D.2d 825; Ledda v. Minkin, 149 A.D.2d 471; see also, Capraro v. Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 245 A.D.2d 256; Leale v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 222 A.D.2d 414; D'Acunzo v. Rouse S.I. Shopping Ctr., 214 A.D.2d 531).

O'Brien, J. P., Santucci, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Valient v. Rimland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 10, 1998
253 A.D.2d 463 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Valient v. Rimland

Case Details

Full title:SANDRA VALIENT, Plaintiff, v. AARON RIMLAND et al., Respondents, and…

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

Date published: Aug 10, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 463 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
675 N.Y.S.2d 324

Citing Cases

Malcolm v. Kapur

Defendants "failed to establish as a matter of law that the condition was not visible and apparent or that it…