KAUFMAN v. STARBUCKS CORPORATION (2026)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Morales–Minerva, J.), entered May 5, 2025, which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, who fell in defendant's coffee shop after she allegedly “collided” with one or more other persons, sues defendant for the injuries she allegedly sustained in the fall on the theory that the collision resulted from overcrowding in the store.  The only evidence defendant submitted in support of its motion for summary judgment was the testimony of a barista who was not working at the time of plaintiff's accident and therefore could not attest to the conditions in the store at that time.  Defendant failed to carry its burden as the movant to present evidence establishing its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.  Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment was properly denied, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572 [1986];  Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718 [1980] ).