Summary
The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed the denial of defendants' motion for summary judgment in a premises-liability action involving a plaintiff who slipped on a worn marble stair tread. The court held that a worn marble tread, without more, was not an actionable defect and that plaintiff's evidence failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding inadequate slip resistance or causation.
Holdings
- A worn marble tread, without more, is not an actionable defect.
- Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact because her experts did not establish that the stair treads lacked adequate slip resistance under an accepted industry standard.
- Plaintiff's expert affidavits did not raise a triable issue of fact because their opinions regarding the cause of the slip were speculative.
Questions Presented
- Whether a worn marble stair tread, without more, constitutes an actionable dangerous condition supporting a premises-negligence claim.
- Whether plaintiff's expert submissions raised a triable issue of fact concerning inadequate slip resistance or the cause of her fall.
- Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the negligent ownership, management, and maintenance claim.
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (5)
- Sims v 3349 Hull Ave. Realty Co. LLC, 106 AD3d 466 (1st Dept 2013)(followed)
- Savio v Rose Flower Chinese Rest., Inc., 103 AD3d 575 (1st Dept 2013)(followed)
- Clarke v Verizon N.Y., Inc., 138 AD3d 505, 506 (1st Dept 2016), lv denied 28 NY3d 906 (2016)(followed)
- Jenkins v New York City Hous. Auth., 11 AD3d 358, 360 (1st Dept 2004)(followed)
- Sarmiento v C & E Assoc., 40 AD3d 524, 526-527 (1st Dept 2007)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…