28 THE QUEENS COURIER • DECEMBER 5, 2019 FOR BREAKING NEWS VISIT WWW.QNS.COM
Flushing Cemetery has completed construction of the
Memorial Chapel Mausoleum
Families now have the options of inurnment of cremated remains and
crypt entombment as means of interment and memorialization.
It is with great pride and pleasure that
the Board of Trustees of Flushing Cemetery
the opening of its newly constructed
Memorial Chapel Mausoleum.
The 75 acre countryside cemetery,
lovingly referred to as the
Wonderland of a Million Blooms,
has provided a beautiful resting place
for those who have passed on since 1853.
In addition to its nearly 3400 niches,
the Memorial Chapel Mausoleum
will provide Flushing Cemetery the ability,
for the fi rst time in its 165 year history,
to off er families the option of crypt
entombment in a community mausoleum.
General Manager John Helly stated,
“With cremation rates in New York expected to be
over 50% by the year 2022 and with many cemeteries
facing the reality of dwindling land acreage,
our new mausoleum, with its options of niches and
crypts, will allow Flushing Cemetery to serve the needs
of our community for decades to come”.
Those looking to inquire can call the cemetery offi ce at 718-359-0100
Q: I was shopping at an indoor mall. It was being remodeled. On the floor, self-leveling concrete had
been poured. On the concrete, a temporary masonite covering had been laid. A piece of the covering had
become warped, and I tripped on it.
A: The owner of the mall owed to you a common-law duty to maintain its property in a reasonably
safe condition in view of all the circumstances, including the likelihood of injury to others, the seriousness of
the injury, and the burden of avoiding the risk. Owners of real property onto which members of the public are
invited have a nondelegable duty to provide the public with reasonably safe premises.
To prevail against the owner, you will need evidence that it had at least constructive notice of the
hazard posed by the masonite covering. A defendant has constructive notice of a dangerous condition when the
condition is visible and apparent, and has existed for a sufficient length of time before the accident such that
the hazard could have been discovered and corrected.
Your attorney is likely to seek evidence that the owner had neglected properly to inspect the mall
on the morning of your fall. If the owner instead describes what it normally would do and probably did, your
attorney will point out that general inspection policies and practices do not prove that the owner actually made
the effort required of it on the morning in question.
The remodeling contractor, however, did not owe you the common-law duty to provide safe
premises. If it advisable to name the contractor as an additional defendant, then your attorney is likely to
proceed on the theory that the contractor, in laying the masonite covering, breached a different duty: not to
launch an ‘instrument of harm’.
Call Now & End Your Tax Nightmare!
Co-Author of the
best selling book
“Breaking the Tax Code”
Salvatore P. Candela, EA, ATA, ABA
Enrolled Agent - Tax Advisor