Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross-claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
The law is well established that a property owner is under no duty to pedestrians to remove ice and snow that naturally accumulates upon the sidewalk in front of his premises (see, Stewart v. Yeshiva Nachlas Haleviym, 186 A.D.2d 731). A failure to remove all of the snow is not negligence ( Spicehandler v. City of New York, 303 N.Y. 946), and liability will not result unless it is shown that the defendant made the sidewalk more hazardous (Stewart v. Yeshiva Nachlas Haleviym, supra). After the appellant made out a prima facie case for summary judgment, the plaintiff offered no evidentiary proof that the appellant created a dangerous condition or made any attempts at snow removal. Accordingly, the appellant's motion for summary judgment should have been granted.
Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman, Krausman and Lerner, JJ., concur.