Case Name: Madeline B. Ward, Appellant, v. City of New York et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2011-11-15
Citations: 89 A.D.3d 532
Docket Number: 
Parties: Madeline B. Ward, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 89
Pages: 532–532

Head Matter:
Madeline B. Ward, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.
[932 NYS2d 689]

Opinion:
At trial, plaintiffs counsel unequivocally stated that the sole theory of recovery upon which plaintiffs claims were premised was that of prior written notice to the City. Therefore, plaintiff waived affirmative negligence as a theory of liability, and her arguments pertaining thereto are not preserved for review (see Spierer v Bloomingdale's, 44 AD3d 336 [2007]).
Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion by denying plaintiffs motion to reopen.
We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unpersuasive. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Catterson, Moskowitz, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.