Case Name: Harry Kushner et al., Appellants, v. City of Albany, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2006-06-06
Citations: 7 N.Y.3d 726
Docket Number: 
Parties: Harry Kushner et al., Appellants, v City of Albany, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 7
Pages: 726–727

Head Matter:
[850 NE2d 1157, 818 NYS2d 182]
Harry Kushner et al., Appellants, v City of Albany, Respondent.
Decided June 6, 2006
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Rothschild Law Firm, EC., Syracuse (Martin J. Rothschild of counsel), for appellants.
Napierski, Vandenburgh & Napierski, L.L.E., Albany (Eugene Daniel Napierski of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The Appellate Division properly determined that plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact sufficient to withstand a motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether plaintiffs alleged injuries resulted from an affirmative act of negligence that would preclude defendant City of Albany from relying on its prior written notice law (see Amabile v City of Buffalo, 93 NY2d 471, 473-474 [1999]).
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.