Case Name: David Poplaski, Plaintiff, v. City of New York et al., Defendants; Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Nico Asphalt, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant-Respondent, and Triumph Construction Corp., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent-Appellant. (And a Fourth-Party Action.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2014-01-14
Citations: 113 A.D.3d 449
Docket Number: 
Parties: David Poplaski, Plaintiff, v City of New York et al., Defendants. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v Nico Asphalt, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant-Respondent, and Triumph Construction Corp., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent-Appellant. (And a Fourth-Party Action.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 113
Pages: 449–449

Head Matter:
David Poplaski, Plaintiff, v City of New York et al., Defendants. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v Nico Asphalt, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant-Respondent, and Triumph Construction Corp., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent-Appellant. (And a Fourth-Party Action.)
[977 NYS2d 890]

Opinion:
The third-party defendants, a re-grading contractor and a repaving contractor, established prima facie that the work they performed did not cause or create the defect that plaintiff claims caused his accident (see Jones v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc., 95 AD3d 659 [1st Dept 2012]). Con Edison has failed to raise an issue about a height differential between its grate and the surrounding roadway that allegedly caused the rear wheel of plaintiff's scooter to lose traction. Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Freedman and Feinman, JJ.