Bonomonte v City of New York
2011 NY Slip Op 07150 [17 NY3d 866]
October 13, 2011
Court of Appeals
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.


[*1]
Dominic Bonomonte, Appellant,
v
City of New York, Respondent.

Decided October 13, 2011

Bonomonte v City of New York, 79 AD3d 515, affirmed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Apicella & Schlesinger, New York City (Alan C. Kestenbaum of counsel), for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Ronald E. Sternberg of counsel), for respondent.

{**17 NY3d at 867} OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative. Even assuming, as plaintiff alleges, that the City of New York owed plaintiff a duty and breached that duty, the City was entitled to summary [*2]judgment dismissing the complaint because it established, as a matter of law, that any negligence on its part was not a proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries (see Sheehan v City of New York, 40 NY2d 496, 503 [1976]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, etc.