Case ID: misc2d_185/html/0517-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[716 NYS2d 549]
    Jacqueline Do Espirito Santo, Respondent, v City of New York et al., Respondents, and New York City Educational Construction Fund, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 16, 2000
    APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Joseph A. Oliva of counsel), for appellant. Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel (Larry A. Sonnenshein and Kathleen Alberton of counsel), for City of New York and another, respondents.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Order entered June 14, 1999 reversed, with $10 costs, motion granted, and complaint dismissed. The clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant-appellant dismissing the complaint as against it.

The hazard to which plaintiff attributes her fall and injury, an uneven and “uplift [ed]” exterior step on premises owned by defendant-appellant, is not alleged or shown to constitute a defect violative of any specific statutory safety provision (see, Manning v New York Tel. Co., 157 AD2d 264). No basis is shown, therefore, to impose liability upon defendant, an out-of-possession owner which had relinquished control over the premises years before the occurrence of plaintiffs injury (supra; Gomez v Walton Realty Assocs., 258 AD2d 307).

Parness, P. J., McCooe and Gangel-Jacob, JJ., concur.