In re Amanda L., 226 A.D.2d 1069 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). · Go Syfert
In re Amanda L., 226 A.D.2d 1069 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
10 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Baggott v. Corcoran
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
Although plaintiff testified at his deposition that he noticed the ladder shaking before he fell, it is well established that defendant had no duty to warn him of obvious conditions (see Cramer v County of Erie, 23 AD3d 1145 [2005]; Christmann v Murphy, 226 AD2d 1069, 1070 [1996], lv denied 89 NY2d 801 [1996]).
discussed Cited "see" Savoie v. Gigliotti
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
Because the staircase and its environs were reasonably safe, defendants had no duty to warn upon which liability could be predicated ( see Plis v North Bay Cadillac , 5 AD3d 578, 578 [2d Dept 2004]; see generally Christmann v Murphy , 226 AD2d 1069, 1070 [4th Dept 1996], lv denied 89 NY2d 801 [1996]).
discussed Cited "see" Mazurek v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
It is well settled that a landowner has no duty to warn of an open and obvious dangerous condition (see Tagle v Jakob, 97 NY2d 165, 169 [2001]), because “in such instances the condition is a warning in itself’ (Thornhill v Toys “R” Us NYTEX, 183 AD2d 1071, 1073 [1992]; see Christmann v Murphy, 226 AD2d 1069, 1070 [1996], lv denied 89 NY2d 801 [1996]).
discussed Cited "see" Prairie v. Sacandaga Bible Conference Camp
N.Y. App. Div. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
A ladder is a “simple appliance” (Dougherty v Weeks & Son, 126 App Div 786, 790 ) and in cases such as this where the dangers associated with its use are obvious and readily apparent, there can be no liability on defendant’s part for failing “to protect plaintiff from the unfortunate consequences of his own actions” (Macey v Truman, 70 NY2d 918, 919 , amended 71 NY2d 949 ; see, Christmann v Murphy, 226 AD2d 1069 , lv denied 89 NY2d 801 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Amanda L., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Donald L., Appellant Chautauqua County Department of Social Services
Appeal No. 2.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Apr 19, 1996.
226 A.D.2d 1069
Published

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Same Memorandum as in Matter of Shatina L. (226 AD2d 1069 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Chautauqua County Family Court, Hartley, J.—Terminate Parental Rights.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Balio and Davis, JJ.