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.
Jenny DELVALLE-STONE, appellant, v. ULTIMATE SERVICE, INC., respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated October 14, 2004, which, inter alia, granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant, a cleaning service retained to sweep and vacuum the floors of the retail store where the plaintiff fell, owed no duty to the plaintiff because it did not completely displace or assume the general duty of the store's owner to keep the premises in a safe condition (see Espinal v. Melville Snow Contrs., 98 N.Y.2d 136, 141, 746 N.Y.S.2d 120, 773 N.E.2d 485; Grau v. Taxter Park Assocs., 283 A.D.2d 551, 724 N.Y.S.2d 497).
Further, the defendant made a prima facie showing that it did not launch a force or instrument of harm and thus create or exacerbate any allegedly dangerous condition, and the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to that showing (see Espinal v. Melville Snow Contrs., supra at 139, 746 N.Y.S.2d 120, 773 N.E.2d 485; Gaitan v. Regional Maintenance Corp., 6 A.D.3d 495, 496, 774 N.Y.S.2d 416; Clapp v. City of New York, 302 A.D.2d 347, 753 N.Y.S.2d 891; Moquin v. Romeo, 301 A.D.2d 581, 753 N.Y.S.2d 857; Carricato v. Jefferson Val. Mall Ltd. Partnership, 299 A.D.2d 444, 445, 749 N.Y.S.2d 575; Davis v. City of New York, 255 A.D.2d 356, 357-358, 679 N.Y.S.2d 423; DeCurtis v. T.H. Assocs., 241 A.D.2d 536, 537, 661 N.Y.S.2d 642; cf. Baillet v. Auerbach, 277 A.D.2d 335, 717 N.Y.S.2d 215; Grizzaffi v. Paparodero Holding Corp., 261 A.D.2d 437, 438, 690 N.Y.S.2d 93; Roca v. Gerardi, 243 A.D.2d 616, 617, 663 N.Y.S.2d 230; Caro v. Skyline Terrace Coop., 132 A.D.2d 512, 513, 517 N.Y.S.2d 531).
In light of the foregoing, it is unnecessary to reach the issue of notice.
The plaintiff's remaining contention is without merit (see 22 NYCRR 202.21 [d] ).
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: October 10, 2006
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)