Hyperlawhypertext legal database Kushner v. City of Albany 7 N.Y.3d 726

← Cases

Kushner v. City of Albany

7 N.Y.3d 726 Court N.Y. Decision date 2006-06-06 English

Contents

Majority

p. 726
[850 NE2d 1157, 818 NYS2d 182]
Harry Kushner et al., Appellants, v City of Albany, Respondent.
Decided June 6, 2006
p. 727
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Rothschild Law Firm, EC., Syracuse (Martin J. Rothschild of counsel), for appellants.
Napierski, Vandenburgh & Napierski, L.L.E., Albany (Eugene Daniel Napierski of counsel), for respondent.

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 sufficient to withstand a motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether plaintiffs alleged injuries resulted from an affirmative act of negligence that would preclude defendant City of Albany from relying on its prior written notice law (see Amabile v City of Buffalo, 93 NY2d 471 , 473-474 [1999]).

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

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cases cited