Case Name: Mary Mascaro et al., Appellants, v. State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1976-02-10
Citations: 38 N.Y.2d 870
Docket Number: Claim No. 52834
Parties: Mary Mascaro et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 38
Pages: 870–871

Head Matter:
Mary Mascaro et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondent.
(Claim No. 52834.)
Argued January 8, 1976;
decided February 10, 1976
Ira M. Hariton for appellants.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Douglas L. Manley and Ruth Kessler Toch of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Memorandum. There was insufficient proof in this case on which to posit a finding that there was a duty on the part of the State to maintain the curb in issue here. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the Appellate Division. Our disposition makes it unnecessary to decide between the Court of Claims' and the Appellate Division's findings of fact on the issues of negligence and notice.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.