Sato v Ippudo NY
Annotate this Case
Sato v Ippudo NY
2013 NY Slip Op 05849
Decided on September 12, 2013
Court of Appeals
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on September 12, 2013
No. 246 SSM 19
[*1]Hideki Sato, et al., Appellants,
v
Ippudo NY, et al., Respondents.
Submitted by Brian J. Isaac, for appellants.
Submitted by Marcy Sonneborn, for respondents.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning whether defendants' alleged negligence in failing to provide adequate warning of the presence of the staircase or adequate lighting in the staircase and surrounding area caused his fall. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.
Decided September 12, 2013
Decided on September 12, 2013
No. 246 SSM 19
[*1]Hideki Sato, et al., Appellants,
v
Ippudo NY, et al., Respondents.
Submitted by Brian J. Isaac, for appellants.
Submitted by Marcy Sonneborn, for respondents.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning whether defendants' alleged negligence in failing to provide adequate warning of the presence of the staircase or adequate lighting in the staircase and surrounding area caused his fall. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.
Decided September 12, 2013
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
