[Download] "Angelina Giammarino v. Angelo's Royal Pastry Shop" by Supreme Court of New York # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Angelina Giammarino v. Angelo's Royal Pastry Shop
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 03, 1990
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 75 KB
Description
DECISION & ORDER The plaintiff Angelina Giammarino allegedly slipped and fell on a piece of cake while leaving Angelo's
Royal Pastry Ship, Inc. The cake was on the public sidewalk approximately four or five inches from the concrete step from
which she had descended. The plaintiffs sued, inter alia, Emafam, Ltd., the owner of the premises, and Angelo's Royal Pastry
Shop, Inc., as occupier of the premises, claiming Angelina Gaimmarino's injuries resulted from the alleged negligence of these
defendants in permitting a dangerous condition to exist on their premises. The defendants Emafam, Ltd., and Angelo's Royal
Pastry Shop, Inc., separately moved for summary judgment, claiming that, as a matter of law, as owner or occupier of land
abutting a public sidewalk does not generally owe the public a duty to keep the sidewalk in a safe condition. An exception
to this rule exists where the defect in the sidewalk was created by the owner or occupier or exists because of the owner or
occupier's special use of a public way for its own benefit (see, Eksouzian v Levenson, 139 A.D.2d 690). The plaintiffs responded
that the step between the front entrance of the pastry shop and the sidewalk constituted a special use which benefited the
pastry shop in that it provided a convenient entry to the shop, and added to its attractiveness. The plaintiffs have failed to satisfy any of the elements needed to impose liability on the defendants Emafam, Ltd., and
Angelo's Royal Pastry Shop, Inc. They failed to put forth any credible evidence that these defendants created the defective
condition which allegedly caused the plaintiff Angelina Giammarino to slip and fall, since all baking was done on the premises,
and the only people who took baked goods out of the store were its customers. The plaintiffs also failed to put forth any
evidence indicating these defendants' special use of the public sidewalk. Their assertions that the step was designed to add
to the shop's attractiveness and to provide a convenient entry into the shop are insufficient to bring the case within the
special use exception.