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.
Ida SPAGNOLA, et al., appellants, v. TRUMP TAJ MAHAL, INC., respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Cusick, J.), dated April 14, 1998, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
At approximately 10:30 A.M. on July 18, 1994, the plaintiff Ida Spagnola slipped on what she believed to be an accumulation of water on a tile floor at the Sultan's Feast Restaurant operated by the defendant in Atlantic City, New Jersey. As the Supreme Court found, the defendant made an initial showing of entitlement to summary judgment by submitting evidence which established that no “wet mopping” had been done between the hours of 6:30 A.M. and 10:30 A.M. and that “wet mopping” was instead routinely performed during the “graveyard shift”, prior to the opening of the restaurant at 6:30 A.M. While the plaintiff submitted evidence which tended to establish that an employee of the defendant had been seen in the area using a mop shortly before the accident, there is inadequate evidence to associate that mopping, which may have been “dry mopping”, with the accumulation of water upon which the plaintiff later slipped. We therefore agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate an issue of fact as to whether the defendant created, or had actual or constructive notice of, the condition which caused the accident (see generally, Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 501 N.Y.S.2d 646, 492 N.E.2d 774).
MEMORANDUM BY 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.
Decided: May 24, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)