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.
DAWN M. JACKSON, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. 681 FILLMORE, LLC, GORDON FILLMORE, LLC, WESTERN NEW YORK CHECK SERVICES, LLC, AND FILLMORE WINE AND LIQUOR, 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 to recover damages for injuries that she allegedly sustained when she slipped and fell on the sidewalk in front of premises owned or operated by defendants. Supreme Court denied defendants’ respective motions for summary judgment dismissing, inter alia, the complaint against them. We affirm.
Contrary to defendants’ contentions, we conclude that the court properly denied their motions inasmuch as they failed to meet their initial burden of establishing that plaintiff's injuries were caused by a storm in progress (see Walter v United Parcel Serv., Inc., 56 AD3d 1187, 1187-1188 [4th Dept 2008]; cf. Battaglia v MDC Concourse Ctr., LLC, 175 AD3d 1026, 1027 [4th Dept 2019], affd 34 NY3d 1164 [2020]). In support of their motions, defendants submitted the deposition testimony of plaintiff, who testified that there was no precipitation at the time of the accident. Defendants also submitted a video of the accident showing that it was only lightly raining and there was no snow on the ground in front of the relevant properties, although there were small mounds of old accumulated snow near the road. Inasmuch as defendants failed to meet their initial burden, the court properly denied their motions without regard to the sufficiency of plaintiff's opposing papers (see generally Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]).
Entered: December 23, 2022
Ann Dillon Flynn
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 826
Decided: December 23, 2022
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)