Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
KELLY HAYES, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. NORSTAR APARTMENTS, LLC, AND SIARA MANAGEMENT, INC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she sustained when she allegedly slipped and fell on ice in the parking lot of an apartment building owned by defendant Norstar Apartments, LLC and managed by defendant Siara Management, Inc. We conclude that Supreme Court properly denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Although defendants met their initial burden of establishing as a matter of law that there was a storm in progress at the time of the accident (see Chapman v. Pyramid Co. of Buffalo, 63 AD3d 1623; Brierley v. Great Lakes Motor Corp., 41 AD3d 1159, 1160), the evidence submitted by plaintiff, particularly the detailed affidavit from her expert meteorologist and the accompanying weather reports, raised an issue of fact whether the ice in question had formed prior to commencement of the storm (see Schuster v. Dukarm, 38 AD3d 1358; Williams v. Patrick, 30 AD3d 1059; see also Bullard v. Pfohl's Tavern, Inc., 11 AD3d 1026). We reject defendants' further contention that they are entitled to summary judgment because they established that plaintiff fell on snow that had recently fallen rather than ice previously formed. Plaintiff's deposition testimony was sufficient to raise an issue of fact in that regard as well.
Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: CA 10-00643
Decided: October 01, 2010
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)