Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision affirms the Supreme Court's denial of the defendants' motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action arising from a plaintiff's fall on a staircase. The court held that the defendants failed to establish prima facie that they did not create the alleged hazardous condition or have actual or constructive notice of it. Relying on deposition testimony and photographs, the appellate court found triable issues of fact regarding the staircase's safety and the defendants' notice, making summary judgment inappropriate.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendants, as landowners, bore the burden of establishing lack of notice and dangerous condition in a summary‑judgment motion
- Whether genuine issues of material fact existed precluding summary judgment
Holdings
- The appellate division affirmed the lower court’s order denying summary judgment because the defendants failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.
Key quotations
“"A property owner, or a party in possession or control of real property, has a duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition" (Cabanas v. Qiu Yu Zou, 215 AD3d 726, 727).” (at 1)
“"In a premises liability case, a defendant landowner moving for summary judgment has the burden of establishing, prima facie, that it did not create the alleged dangerous condition or have actual or constructive notice of its existence for a sufficient length of time to have discovered and remedied it" (Cabanas v. Qiu Yu Zou, 215 AD3d at 727).” (at 1)
Factual background
Malka Giahn fell in September 2018 while descending an interior staircase at premises owned by the defendants in Fresh Meadows. The defendants owned and controlled the property. The plaintiff alleges the staircase was defective and caused her injuries.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Queens County denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment on April 11, 2023; the defendants appealed that order.