Case Name: Elmer Eddy et al., Appellants, v. Tops Friendly Markets et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1983-05-03
Citations: 59 N.Y.2d 692
Docket Number: 
Parties: Elmer Eddy et al., Appellants, v Tops Friendly Markets et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 59
Pages: 692–694

Head Matter:
Elmer Eddy et al., Appellants, v Tops Friendly Markets et al., Respondents.
Decided May 3, 1983
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Peter A. Vinolus for appellant.
Paul I. Perlman for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [g]), order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (91 AD2d 1203; see, also, Madrid v City of New York, 42 NY2d 1039; and 1 NY PJI2d 274-275).
We do not reach and have not considered appellant's argument, raised for the first time before us, that notice is not an element of an action against a self-service supermarket with respect to a fall caused by material in the aisle (see Ann., 85 ALR3d 1000).
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg, Meyer and Simons concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [g]), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.