Scafidi v. Town of IslipScafidi v. Town of Islip
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
“The affidavit of an official charged with the responsibility of keeping an indexed record of all notices of defective conditions received by [a town] is sufficient to establish that no prior written notice was filed” (Cruz v City of New York, 218 AD2d 546, 547 [1995]; see Campisi v Bronx Water & Sewer Serv., 1 AD3d 166, 167 [2003]; Cortes v City of Mount Vernon, 262 AD2d 441 [1999]; cf. Goldberger v Village of Kiryas Joel, 31 AD3d 496 [2006]; Rupp v City of Port Jervis, 10 AD3d 391 [2004]). Contrary to the determination of the Supreme Court, the plaintiff Robert Scafidi’s conclusory and unsubstantiated claim that he supplied the defendant with prior written notice of the allegedly defective condition was inadequate to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]).
Accordingly, the defendant established, prima facie, its entitlement