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.
Deborah A. MATTHEWS, Respondent, v. COUNTY OF ORANGE, et al., Appellants.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), entered December 5, 2000, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The plaintiff entered a building operated by the defendant Orange County Community College during an ongoing mixed snow and rain storm. As she started to cross a second floor hallway going to a class, the plaintiff slipped and fell on the damp floor, injuring herself. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding the existence of an issue of fact as to whether or not the defendants had constructive notice of the allegedly defective condition. We disagree and therefore reverse.
The defendants met their initial burden of showing, as a matter of law, that there was insufficient time for them to have constructive notice of the damp floor. Since the plaintiff failed to submit any proof as to how long the damp condition had existed on the floor, and whether or not it was visible and apparent for a sufficient amount of time to have allowed the defendants' employees to have discovered the condition and remedied it, the Supreme Court should have granted the motion (see, Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 501 N.Y.S.2d 646, 492 N.E.2d 774; Zguris v. K-Mart Corp., 285 A.D.2d 591, 592, 728 N.Y.S.2d 188; Znaniecki v. Wal-Mart Stores, 284 A.D.2d 329, 725 N.Y.S.2d 558).
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.
Decided: March 18, 2002
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)