Appeal (1) from an order of the Supreme Court (Swartwood, J.), entered December 16, 1986 in Tompkins County, which, inter alia, granted defendant Gloria Thompson’s motion for summary judgmеnt dismissing the complaint and amended complaint against her, and (2) from the judgment entered thereon.
On April 29, 1985, plaintiff Theresa Kiernan (hereinafter plaintiff) was wаlking along the sidewalk directly in front of premises owned by defendant Gloria Thomрson on the east side of South Albany Street in the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County. Plaintiffs аllege that the cracked and broken sidewalk had been in a dangerous, defective and unsafe condition for a long period of time. The sidewalk’s dеteriorated condition allegedly caused plaintiff to fall into or trip uрon a jagged crack several inches wide and deep. When she landed on the ground and/or sidewalk, plaintiff sustained a fractured right elbow and right arm, bruises, contusions and other serious and permanent injuries.
Plaintiffs commenced this aсtion against Thompson and defendant City of Ithaca, alleging that both defendаnts were negligent in failing to maintain the sidewalk in a safe condition. The city moved for summary judgment dismissing the claim against it upon the ground that it was not provided with prior writtеn notice of the sidewalk defect, which motion was granted by Supreme Court. Upon appeal, this court reversed, holding that the proposed amended complaint asserted a cause of action based upon thе affirmative negligence of the city in creating the unsafe condition of the sidewalk by removing a tree stump on December 7, 1982 and, accordingly, the failurе to give the prior written notice mandated by local law did not require dismissal (see, Kiernan v Thompson,
Thompson moved for an order granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to her, and рlaintiffs cross-moved for leave to amend the complaint so as to аllege that the city’s removal of the same tree stump conferred a special benefit upon her. Supreme Court granted plaintiffs’ cross motion to amend the complaint and also granted Thompson’s motion for
We affirm. It is well settled that an owner of land abutting on a public sidewalk does not, solely by reason of being an abutter, owe to the public a duty to keep the sidewalk in a safе condition (City of Rochester v Campbell,
Plaintiffs’ remaining argument, thаt the removal of a tree stump from the area in front of Thompson’s prоperty some years prior to the subject accident conferred a special benefit upon the premises, is equally unavailing. Although the use of a sidewalk for a special purpose may impose liability upon an аbutting owner (see, Colson v Wood Realty Co.,
Inasmuch as there were no questions of fact, Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint against Thompson.
Order and judgment affirmed, with costs. Kane, J. P., Casey, Levine, Harvey and Mercure, JJ., concur.