Flores v. Langsam Prop. Servs. Corp., 918 N.E.2d 944 (N.Y. 2009). · Go Syfert
Search
Flores v. Langsam Prop. Servs. Corp., 918 N.E.2d 944 (N.Y. 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 1 distinct court.
How cited ↗
Cited for

No citing cases on record.

Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Eva Flores, Appellant,
v.
Langsam Property Services Corp. Et Al., Respondents
New York Court of Appeals.
Oct 20, 2009.
Published opinion
918 N.E.2d 944
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Raymond Schwartzberg & Associates, PLLC, New York City (Steven I. Brizel of counsel), for appellant., McMahon, Martine & Gallagher, LLP, Brooklyn {Patrick W. Brophy of counsel), for respondents.
Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones Concur.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

[*812] OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding defendants’ actual or constructive notice of the particular dangerous condition that allegedly caused her injuries (see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 838 [1986]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.