Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
New York Court of Appeals, 2004

Zanki v. Cahill

Zanki v. Cahill
New York Court of Appeals · Decided May 11, 2004 · Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith Concur
812 N.E.2d 1257; 2 N.Y.3d 783; 780 N.Y.S.2d 307; 2 N.Y. 783; 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1037 (North Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Zanki v. Cahill

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 whether the alleged injuries resulted from a dangerous recurring condition of which defendant Cushman & Wakefield had actual or constructive notice.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑