Zanki v. Cahill

New York Court of Appeals May 11, 2004

Zanki v. Cahill, 812 N.E.2d 1257 (N.Y. 2004)

2 N.Y.3d 783; 780 N.Y.S.2d 307; 2 N.Y. 783; 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1037

Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith Concur

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.

Reference

Full Case Name: Enisa Zanki Et Al., Appellants, v. Gerald K. Cahill Et Al., Defendants, and Cushman & Wakefield, Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. California JKC Properties, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent, Et Al., Third-Party Defendants
Cited By: 10 cases
Status: Published