Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed an order denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment in a personal-injury action arising from the plaintiff's fall in a parking lot. The court held that video surveillance established that the plaintiff fell after traversing the speed bump, rather than because of a crack in it, and therefore any alleged negligence in maintaining the speed bump was not a proximate cause of the accident.
Holdings
- The defendant was entitled to summary judgment because the video surveillance established prima facie that the plaintiff did not trip on a crack in the speed bump and that any negligence in maintaining the speed bump was not a proximate cause of the accident.
- The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the defendant's motion.
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendant established entitlement to summary judgment by demonstrating that an alleged defect in the speed bump was not a proximate cause of the plaintiff's fall.
- Whether the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact in opposition to the defendant's summary judgment motion.
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (2)
- Schneider v. Gap, Inc., 208 A.D.3d 606, 607(followed)
- Pasquaretto v. Long Is. Univ., 150 A.D.3d 1129, 1130-1131(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…