Majority
Defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, in this action where plaintiff alleges that she was injured when she tripped and fell on a long crack between pavement flags in a walkway that was between two buildings owned by defendants. Defendants submitted evidence, including deposition testimony, an affidavit of an inspector who measured the crack as one-fourth-inch deep, and photographs, demonstrating that the subject defect was trivial and thus, not actionable (see Hutchinson v Sheridan Hill House Corp., 26 NY3d 66 [2015]; Stylianou v Ansonia Condominium, 49 AD3d 399 [1st Dept 2008]). The photographs show that the crack was in the middle of the walkway, in a well-illuminated location, and was not hidden or covered in any way so as to make it difficult to see and identify as a hazard (see e.g. Hutchinson at 78-80).
In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the crack in the walkway constituted a dangerous condition under the circumstances. She provided no affidavit of a person who had measured the crack, but only her own and her daughter’s estimates of its depth.
We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Concur — Renwick, J.R, Andrias, Saxe and Richter, JJ.
Cases cited
- Hutchinson v. Sheridan Hill House Corp. 26 NY3d 66 p. 556