Summary
This New York Appellate Division decision affirms the trial court's grant of summary judgment dismissing a plaintiff's common-law negligence claim arising from a slip-and-fall accident. The court held that the defendant property owner satisfied its prima facie burden by demonstrating it neither created the hazardous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of the water on the stairway. The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition, rendering their expert affidavit speculative and conclusory.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendants were entitled to summary judgment on the negligence claim because they lacked actual or constructive notice of the hazardous condition.
Holdings
- The appellate division affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding actual or constructive notice.
Key quotations
“In a slip‑and‑fall case, a defendant property owner moving for summary judgment has the burden of making a prima facie showing that it neither (1) affirmatively created the hazardous condition nor (2) had actual or constructive notice of the condition and a reasonable time to correct or warn about its existence.” (at 04802)
“To constitute constructive notice, a defect must be visible and apparent and it must exist for a sufficient length of time prior to the accident to permit defendant's employees to discover and remedy it.” (at 04802)
Factual background
On January 31, 2019, plaintiff Rosario Siino slipped and fell on a stairway inside the defendants' premises after observing a significant amount of water on the step. The defendants testified that the stairway was last inspected about 70 minutes before the fall and no liquid was found.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Westchester County granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the common‑law negligence claim. The plaintiffs appealed that order.