Meyer v. New York Lessee LLC

2026 NY Slip Op 02068 (App. Div. 1st Dep't Apr. 7 2026) · Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, First Department · April 7, 2026 · No. Index No. 160358/20; Appeal No. 6300-6301; Case Nos. 2025-00594, 2025-01577

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed a judgment granting defendants summary judgment in a premises-liability action arising from a slip and fall on water during an ongoing rainstorm. The court held that defendants lacked constructive notice of a dangerously wet floor and were not required to continuously mop tracked-in water or produce written maintenance logs.

Court
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, First Department
Writing for the Court
Scarpulla, J.P.; Friedman, J.; Shulman, J.; Rodriguez, J.; Rosado, J.
Jurisdiction
New York Appellate Division, First Department
Decision date
April 7, 2026
Docket number
Index No. 160358/20; Appeal No. 6300-6301; Case Nos. 2025-00594, 2025-01577
Procedural posture
Plaintiff appealed from a judgment entered after Supreme Court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The appeal from the underlying order was dismissed as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.
Standard of review
De novo review of the grant of summary judgment; summary judgment is proper where the moving party establishes entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and no triable issue remains.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Robert L. Meyer et al. v. New York Lessee LLC et al.
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

premises liabilitysummary judgmentnegligencestandard of careappellate procedure

Practice areas

tortspremises liabilitycivil procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment in a premises-liability action arising from plaintiff's slip and fall on rainwater tracked into a hotel during an ongoing rainstorm.
  2. Whether the evidence established that defendants had constructive notice of a dangerously wet floor or were required to produce written maintenance logs to negate constructive notice.

Holdings

  1. Summary judgment was properly granted to defendants because defendants were not required to provide a constant ongoing remedy for moisture tracked indoors during an ongoing rainstorm, and the record did not establish constructive notice of a dangerously wet floor.
  2. Under the circumstances, defendants were not required to produce written maintenance logs because witness testimony, corroborating affidavit evidence, and video evidence sufficiently established the absence of constructive notice.

Key quotations

Given that it was raining, defendants were "not required to provide a constant ongoing remedy for an alleged slippery condition caused by moisture tracked indoors during the storm" ([*1])

Factual background

Plaintiff slipped and fell on water while entering the revolving door of a hotel owned and maintained by defendants during an ongoing rainstorm. A hotel security guard witnessed the accident and testified that housekeeping had mopped inside the revolving door twice within the preceding half hour. Video evidence showed several people carrying wet umbrellas passing through the revolving door without incident before plaintiff's fall.

Procedural history

Supreme Court, New York County, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment and entered a judgment in defendants' favor on February 21, 2025. Plaintiff appealed the judgment and the underlying January 24, 2025 order. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the judgment and dismissed the appeal from the order as subsumed in the judgment appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…