Opinion

Gerzel v. City of New York

  • 117 A.D.2d 549
  • 499 N.Y.S.2d 60
  • 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52825
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Feb 25, 1986
Status
Published
Author
Lynch
On the bench
Lynch
Cited by
50 cases

The opinion

Lynch, J.,

dissents in a memorandum as follows: I would affirm for the reasons stated by Special Term. I add only that I expressly dispute the majority’s pivotal conclusion that "[i]t is manifest on the record that the city acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim by reason of the accident report and photographs”. A photograph showing steps with risers of varying height gives neither actual nor constructive notice of a claim that an accident was caused by the varying height when the report accompanying the photograph states:

"5. If [accident was] caused by any unusual conditions, defects, foreign objects, please describe fully: none

"6. Description of Accident: mr. zerzel [sic] fell coming out cannon’s walk—MISSED THE (2) STEP * * *

"15 * * * Any defects in Floor or Surface none * * *

"18. Injured person’s statement on accident. MR. zerzel say [sic] HE WAS WALKING OUT OF CANNON’S WALK AND DID NOT SEE THE (2) STEP”.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.