87 N.Y.2d 241 (1995)

A municipality’s prior written notice law is strictly construed, and a superseded map indicating a defect does not satisfy the prior written notice requirement if a subsequent map of the same area, not indicating the defect, was filed before the accident.

Summary

Plaintiff sued the City of New York after tripping on a sidewalk defect. The City requires prior written notice of such defects. Plaintiff submitted a 1986 map showing the defect, but the City produced a 1987 “successor” map without the defect. The trial court granted a directed verdict for the City, finding the plaintiff failed to satisfy the prior written notice requirement. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the most current map on file closest to the accident date controls, and plaintiff’s failure to controvert the superseding nature of the later map was fatal to her claim. The court emphasized the need for strict construction of prior written notice statutes.

Facts

1. On February 13, 1988, Alyce Katz tripped and fell on a defective sidewalk on Second Avenue in Manhattan.
2. Katz attempted to comply with New York City’s prior written notice requirement by submitting a map dated June 5, 1986, indicating a defect at the location of her fall.
3. The City produced a “successor” map dated November 4, 1987, which did not show any defect in the accident area.
4. The City’s witness testified that subsequent maps from Big Apple Pothole and Sidewalk Protection Committee, Inc. supersede earlier maps.

Procedural History

1. Alyce Katz sued the City of New York.
2. At trial, the Supreme Court granted the City’s motion for a directed verdict, dismissing the complaint.
3. The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal.
4. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s order.

Issue(s)

1. Whether a prior map indicating a sidewalk defect satisfies the prior written notice requirement when a subsequent map of the same area, not indicating the defect, was filed before the accident.

Holding

1. No, because the City properly requires prior notice to be traced to the most current Big Apple map on file, i.e., the map closest in time to the date the defect allegedly caused the accident.

Court’s Reasoning

The court reasoned that New York City Administrative Code § 7-201(c) limits the City’s duty of care by requiring prior written notice of defects. This requirement is a condition precedent to a lawsuit against the City and is strictly construed because it is a limited waiver of sovereign immunity. Maps prepared by the Big Apple Pothole and Sidewalk Protection Committee serve as valid prior written notice. However, the City’s policy of relying on the most recent map is reasonable and logical. The court emphasized that “[g]iven the Department of Transportation’s mandate to maintain all written notices for three years from the date of receipt and thereafter preserve them in the municipal archives for not less than 10 years (see, Administrative Code § 7-201 [c] [3]), a policy that traces notice to the latest dated map diminishes the potential for an arbitrary, selective search of recorded notices.” Plaintiff failed to rebut the City’s evidence that the 1987 map superseded the 1986 map, and the burden remained on the plaintiff to demonstrate compliance with the notice statute. The dissent argued that once the plaintiff proved the City received notice of the defect via the 1986 map, the burden shifted to the City to prove the defect was corrected.