Hotaling v City of New York, 12 NY3d 862 (2009)

2009 NY Slip Op 04303 [12 NY3d 862]
June 4, 2009
Court of Appeals

[*1]

Christopher Hotaling et al., Appellants,
v
City of New York et al., Respondents.

Decided June 4, 2009

Hotaling v City of New York, 55 AD3d 396, affirmed.

{**12 NY3d at 863} OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. The certified question should not be answered as unnecessary. [*2]

The Appellate Division properly held that the testimony of plaintiffs’ expert was insufficient, as a matter of law, to support a prima facie case of negligent design (see generally Buchholz v Trump 767 Fifth Ave., LLC, 5 NY3d 1, 8-9 [2005]).

Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum; Chief Judge Lippman taking no part.

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