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.
Barbara S. SCHOEN, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. TOPS MARKETS, LLC, Defendant–Appellant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she allegedly sustained when she slipped and fell on “hair detangler” liquid that was spilled on the floor of defendant's store. In her complaint, plaintiff alleges theories of negligence premised on actual notice, constructive notice, and creation of a dangerous condition. Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and Supreme Court denied the motion. On appeal, defendant concedes that there are material issues of fact with respect to constructive notice, but contends that the court erred in denying those parts of its motion with respect to the theories of actual notice and creation of a dangerous condition. We agree with defendant that it met its initial burden on the motion with respect to those theories, and that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect thereto (see generally Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718 [1980] ). We therefore reverse the order insofar as appealed from and grant those parts of defendant's motion.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted in part, and the complaint is dismissed to the extent that the complaint, as amplified by the bill of particulars, alleges that defendant had actual notice of or created the allegedly dangerous condition.
Memorandum:
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: 21
Decided: March 16, 2018
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)