A municipality that has enacted a prior written notification law may avoid liability for a defect or hazardous condition that falls within the scope of the law if it can establish that it had not been notified in writing of the existence of the defect or hazard.  In the context of a motion to dismiss (in the Second Department, at least), when the municipality establishes that it has a prior written notice law, that the subject defect falls within the ambit of that law, and that the municipality lacks any prior written notice of a defect at the subject location, “the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the applicability of one of two recognized exceptions to the rule—that the municipality affirmatively created the defect through an act of negligence or that a special use resulted in a special benefit to the locality.”  Smith v. City of New York, 210 A.D.3d 53, 69 (2d Dep’t 2022) (citing the Court of Appeals decisions in Yarborough v City of New York, 10 NY3d 726 (2008) and Groninger v Village of Mamaroneck, 17 NY3d 125 (2011)).  The court clarified that to the extent Second Department case law conflicts with the burden-shifting standard set forth in Groninger or Yarborough, it should no longer be followed.

An operator of a motor vehicle in New York must follow a myriad of rules when operating a vehicle, among them to make reasonable use of his or her senses, be aware of traffic conditions, drive at a safe rate of speed under the existing conditions, and maintain a safe distance from other vehicles under the existing conditions. See Miller v DeJouza, 165 AD3d 550, 550 (1st Dept 2018).

For a federal court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a), there must be “complete diversity.” No plaintiff can share citizenship with any defendant. Where a litigant is an individual or even a corporation, the analysis of whether there is “complete diversity” is simple. The analysis, however, could become complicated where a party is a limited liability company, because a limited liability company takes on the citizenship of each of its members for diversity purposes. See Bayerische Landesbank v. Aladdin Capital Mgmt. LLC, 692 F.3d 42, 49 (2d Cir. 2012).