Case Title: Teodorescu v Resnick & Binder, P.C.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: new-york

Court: New York Appellate Court

Date: 2010-03-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
Teodorescu v Resnick & Binder, P.C.


2010 NY Slip Op 02436 [14 NY3d 776]


March 25, 2010


Court of Appeals


Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.


As corrected through Wednesday, May 5, 2010



[*1]
Cecilia Teodorescu, Appellant,vResnick & Binder, P.C., Respondent.Argued February 11, 2010; decided March 25, 2010



Teodorescu v Resnick & Binder, P.C., 55 AD3d 721, reversed.



APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL


Lawrence B. Lame, Jamaica, and Jonah Grossman for appellant.
Kelleher & Maragno, LLP, Albany (John J. Kelleher of counsel), for respondent.

{**14 NY3d at 776} OPINION OF THE COURT

Order reversed, with costs, and defendant's motion for summary judgment denied. We hold, contrary to the Appellate Division, that plaintiff raised issues of fact regarding whether she could have prevailed on a theory of constructive notice.
Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones.