AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

DAVID HECHT, appellant, v. 281 SCARSDALE CORP., ET AL., respondents.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, as the overhead pipe and valve near the wall of the defendants' parking garage upon which the plaintiff struck his head was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous as a matter of law ( see Cupo v. Karfunkel, 1 A.D.3d 48; see also Jang Hee Lee v. Sung Whun Oh, A.D.3d [2d Dept, Jan. 12, 2004]; Gibbons v. Lido Point Lookout Fire Dist., 293 A.D.2d 646; Sorce v. Great Oak Marina, 282 A.D.2d 598). Therefore, the defendants had no duty to warn and did not breach their duty to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition ( see Cupo v. Karfunkel, supra; Gibbons v. Lido Point Lookout Fire Dist., supra; Sorce v. Great Oak Marina, supra).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and COZIER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HECHT v. 281 SCARSDALE CORP
(Jan 26, 2004)