You are here: / / VILLAGE FAILED TO ESTABLISH PRIMA FACIE ENTITLEMENT TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT...
,

VILLAGE FAILED TO ESTABLISH PRIMA FACIE ENTITLEMENT TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHERE INJURY CAUSED BY TREE FALLING IN ROADWAY.

The Second Department determined the defendant village's motion papers did not demonstrate entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint alleging injury to plaintiff-driver caused by a tree falling in the roadway:

A municipality has a duty to maintain its roadways in a reasonably safe condition, and this duty extends to trees adjacent to the road which could pose a danger to travelers … . However, a municipality will not be held liable unless it had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition … . Here, the Village failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law … by demonstrating that it owed no duty to maintain or inspect the tree which fell in the roadway on the date of the subject accident or that it lacked actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition of the tree … . Furthermore, the Village failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the breach of any duty allegedly owed by it was not a proximate cause of the subject accident. Since the Village failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, we need not review the sufficiency of the opposition papers … . Connolly v Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd Harbor, 2016 NY Slip Op 03463, 2nd Dept, 5-4-16

NEGLIGENCE (VILLAGE FAILED TO ESTABLISH PRIMA FACIE ENTITLEMENT TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHERE INJURY CAUSED BY TREE FALLING IN ROADWAY)/MUNICIPAL LAW (VILLAGE FAILED TO ESTABLISH PRIMA FACIE ENTITLEMENT TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHERE INJURY CAUSED BY TREE FALLING IN ROADWAY)

You might also like
FORMAL ADMISSIONS, INFORMAL ADMISSIONS AND JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL EXPLAINED (SECOND DEPT).
QUESTION OF FACT WHETHER DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL PRECLUDED STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS DEFENSE, CRITERIA EXPLAINED.
THE NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION LAW CREATES A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST AN EMPLOYER FOR RETALIATION FOR WHISTLEBLOWING (SECOND DEPT).
Not Enough Time Passed to Invoke Constructive Notice of Icy Condition Under “Storm Progress Rule”
A HEARING IS NECESSARY TO DETERMINE WHETHER SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ON THE DOORMAN OF DEFENDANT’S APARTMENT BUILDING WAS VALID (SECOND DEPT).
Criteria for Determining Sufficiency of Evidence Before Grand Jury Explained 
Gifts from One Spouse to the Other Are Marital Property Subject to Equitable Distribution
Failure to Specifically Demonstrate When Area Where Fall Occurred Was Last Inspected or Cleaned Required Denial of Summary Judgment

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

Copyright © 2023 New York Appellate Digest, LLC
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

PLAINTIFF ASSUMED THE RISK OF STEPPING IN A HOLE ON THE PLAYING FIELD. LANDOWNERS DID NOT HAVE A DUTY TO PROVIDE SECURITY IN PUBLIC VESTIBULE OF THEIR...