The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York recently ruled against the City of Newburgh in a personal injury case involving a sidewalk fall. The court's decision, issued on November 12, 2026, affects the city’s liability in cases where prior written notice of a defect is required. This ruling allows the plaintiff, Jane Schub, to continue her case against the city and another defendant, Liberty Corners, LLC.

The case stems from an incident where Schub allegedly fell on a sidewalk adjacent to property owned by Liberty Corners, LLC. Following the fall, she filed a lawsuit seeking damages for her injuries. The City of Newburgh, as a defendant, sought to dismiss the claims against it, arguing that it had not received prior written notice of the sidewalk's defect, which is a requirement under local law.

In the initial stages of the case, Liberty Corners filed cross-claims against the City, seeking contribution and indemnification. The City moved for summary judgment, requesting that the court dismiss the complaint and all cross-claims against it. However, both Schub and Liberty opposed this motion, asserting that they needed more time for discovery to investigate potential exceptions to the prior written notice rule.

The case reached the Appellate Division after the Supreme Court of Orange County denied the City’s motion for summary judgment in an order dated August 26, 2025. The court found that the City had not demonstrated that there were no genuine issues of material fact regarding the existence of exceptions to the prior written notice requirement.

The Appellate Division judges, Mark C. Dillon, Helen Voutsinas, Laurence L. Love, and Elena Goldberg Velazquez, upheld the lower court's decision. They stated, "A party opposing summary judgment is entitled to obtain further discovery when it appears that facts supporting the opposing party's position may exist but cannot then be stated." This ruling emphasizes the importance of allowing parties to conduct adequate discovery before making a determination on motions for summary judgment.

The court also highlighted that when a municipality has a prior written notice law, it cannot be held liable for defects unless it has received the requisite notice, unless exceptions apply. The judges noted that the plaintiff and Liberty established that further discovery could reveal relevant evidence regarding whether any exceptions to the prior written notice requirement were applicable.

This ruling has significant implications for the City of Newburgh and similar municipalities with prior written notice laws. It indicates that plaintiffs may have more opportunities to pursue claims against cities, especially when there are questions about the existence of defects and the municipality's knowledge of them. The decision underscores the necessity for municipalities to maintain clear records and respond promptly to any reported issues.

Moving forward, this ruling allows Schub to continue her case against the City of Newburgh and Liberty Corners, LLC, as she seeks to prove her claims of negligence. The court's decision also sets a precedent for future cases involving prior written notice laws, potentially making it easier for plaintiffs to challenge dismissals based on lack of notice.

As for the City of Newburgh, it may consider renewing its motion for summary judgment after the completion of discovery, as the court allowed for this possibility. The outcome of this case could influence how municipalities handle similar claims in the future, particularly regarding their obligations to maintain safe public walkways.

Details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. However, it remains to be seen if the City will pursue further legal action following the discovery process.