Big realty llc

Big realty llc DEFAULT
Whether you are an owner looking for management services, a resident of an HOA or a tenant looking to rent, we know that looking for a reputable company can be a challenge. As a full service brokerage, our goal here at BIG Realty – Property Management is to service our customers and clients’ needs.

If you are looking to rent, you can search through our available homes, townhomes and apartments using your computer, tablet or mobile device to help you narrow down your search by size, price, and location. Once you find just the right place, you can fill out an online application in a matter of minutes.

Our residents, whether renting or as owners in an HOA, have many tools to make your renting experience enjoyable, as we provide numerous time saving tools. For all our managed properties we offer online payment options, so you can forget about paper checks and stamps. Residents can also make online maintenance requests, to make sure issues are addressed as quickly as possible.

If you are owner looking for a one-stop turnkey company that can take care of your investments, we can take the hassle out of leasing, collections and repairs so you have more time to do the things you love.

To find out more about the services we can provide, call us, or stop by for a visit today!

Sours: https://www.bigrealtymanagement.com/

Real Estate - Eric Bickel- BIC - BIG Realty

One Last Step

","subTitle":"

Some questions will improve your estimate

","submitText":"Finished","questionList":[{"question":"Are you a first time home buyer?","required":true,"key":"fthb","options":["Yes","No"]},{"question":"Within how many months do you plan to buy a home?","required":true,"key":"timeFrame","options":["0-1","1-3","3-6","6-12","12+"]},{"question":"Have you been pre-qualified for a mortgage?","required":true,"key":"preQual","options":["Yes","No"]},{"question":"Do you have a house to sell first?","required":true,"key":"sellHouse","options":["Yes","No"]},{"question":"Do you have an agent already?","required":true,"key":"hasAgent","options":["Yes","No"]}],"inquirySeller":true,"allowCloseSeller":true,"backgroundColorSeller":"#f5f6fa","titleSeller":"

Sell with Us

","subTitleSeller":"

Please complete this form so our real estate experts can meet your needs.

Create Your Free Account

","registerSubTitle":"

Search Homes and Exclusive Property Listings
(Prices and inventory current as of {currentDate})

","registerTitleTwo":"

Email Registration

","registerSubTitleTwo":"

Just a few more details so we can help you!

","loginTitle":"Sign In","loginSubtitle":"Great to have you back","benefitsTitle":"

Benefits of Registration

","benefitsMarket":"

Receive property alert and market report

","benefitsMoney":"

Local experts can help you save money

","benefitsHomes":"

Find, save, and share your dream homes

Sours: https://www.bigrealtyllc.com/
  1. Wisconsin permit test
  2. Dover township recreation
  3. Ibm drivers download
Mei Xiao Guo v Quong Big Realty Corp.
2011 NY Slip Op 00656 [81 AD3d 610]
February 1, 2011
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, March 30, 2011


Mei Xiao Guo, Respondent-Appellant,
v
Quong Big Realty Corp., Appellant-Respondent.

—[*1]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bunyan, J.), dated January 27, 2010, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the plaintiff cross-appeals from the same order.

Ordered that the cross appeal is dismissed as abandoned (see 22 NYCRR 670.8 [e]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.

A defendant who moves for summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case has the initial burden of making a prima facie showing that it did not create the hazardous condition that allegedly caused the fall, and did not have actual or constructive notice of that condition for a sufficient length of time to discover and remedy it (see Molloy v Waldbaum, Inc., 72 AD3d 659, 660 [2010]; Musachio v Smithtown Cent. School Dist., 68 AD3d 949 [2009]; Holub v Pathmark Stores, Inc., 66 AD3d 741, 742 [2009]; Britto v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., Inc., 21 AD3d 436 [2005]). To meet its burden on the issue of lack of constructive notice, the defendant must offer some evidence as to when the accident site was last cleaned or inspected prior to the plaintiff's fall (see Musachio v Smithtown Cent. School Dist., 68 AD3d 949 [2009]; Holub v Pathmark Stores, Inc., 66 AD3d at 742; Britto v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., Inc., 21 AD3d at 437).

Here, the defendant failed to sustain its initial burden of demonstrating that it did not have constructive notice of the alleged hazardous condition on the staircase of its building because the deposition testimony of its employee failed to establish when the staircase was last inspected or cleaned on the day of the plaintiff's accident (see Farrell v Waldbaum's, Inc., 73 AD3d 846, 847 [2010]; Musachio v Smithtown Cent. School Dist., 68 AD3d 949 [2009]; Rodriguez v Hudson View Assoc., LLC, 63 AD3d 1135, 1136 [2009]; [*2]Britto v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., Inc., 21 AD3d at 437; Joachim v 1824 Church Ave., Inc., 12 AD3d 409, 410 [2004]).

Furthermore, contrary to the defendant's contention, the fact that the alleged hazardous condition on the staircase was open and obvious does not preclude a finding of liability against it for its alleged failure to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition, but rather, raises an issue of fact concerning the plaintiff's possible comparative fault (see Bradley v DiPaterio Mgt. Corp., 78 AD3d 1096 [2010]; DiVietro v Gould Palisades Corp., 4 AD3d 324, 325 [2004]; Cupo v Karfunkel, 1 AD3d 48, 52 [2003]).

Accordingly, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiff's opposition papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 852 [1985]; Molloy v Waldbaum, Inc., 72 AD3d at 660; Rodriguez v Hudson View Assoc., LLC, 63 AD3d at 1136). Florio, J.P., Eng, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.

Sours: https://www.nycourts.gov/REPORTER/3dseries/2011/2011_00656.htm
BIG Realty Year in Review 2019

.

Llc big realty

.

October 19th, The Trader's Edge with Steve Rhodes on TFNN - 2021

.

You will also like:

.



179 180 181 182 183