Majority
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.), entered on or about February 3, 1994, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted, and the complaint against defendant Bloom dismissed, without costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered on or about May 12, 1994, which denied defendant’s motion for renewal and reargument, is deemed a denial of a motion for reargument only and appeal dismissed as taken from a non-appealable order, without costs.
The Supreme Court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for summary judgment since the plaintiff failed to establish the existence of any triable issue of fact (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 ). It is well settled that the owner or lessee of land abutting a public sidewalk owes no duty to the public to keep the sidewalk in a safe condition unless the
Cases cited
- Zuckerman v. City of New York 49 NY2d 557 p. 339
- D'Ambrosio v. City of New York 55 NY2d 454 p. 340
- Roark v. Hunting 24 NY2d 470 p. 340
- Nevins v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. 164 AD2d 807 p. 340
- Nuesi v. City of New York 205 AD2d 370 p. 340