LEIB v. SILO RESTAURANT INC (2006)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated October 26, 2004, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff allegedly sustained personal injuries when she slipped on a mat while exiting the defendant's premises.   The defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.   The Supreme Court granted the motion.

 In opposition to the defendant's establishment of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to submit evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572).   The plaintiff failed to allege that there was anything wrong with the mat, and the mere placement of the mat by the front door of the defendant's premises was not an inherently dangerous condition (see Mansueto v. Worster, 1 A.D.3d 412, 413, 766 N.Y.S.2d 691;   Christopher v. New York City Tr. Auth., 300 A.D.2d 336, 752 N.Y.S.2d 76;   Schoen v. King Kullen Grocery Co., 296 A.D.2d 486, 745 N.Y.S.2d 554;   Boehme v. Edgar Fabrics, 248 A.D.2d 344, 669 N.Y.S.2d 648;  cf. Massucci v. Amoco Oil Co., 292 A.D.2d 351, 352, 738 N.Y.S.2d 386).   Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, she failed to submit evidence sufficient to demonstrate that an alleged inadequate lighting condition was a proximate cause of the accident (see Curran v. Esposito, 308 A.D.2d 428, 429, 764 N.Y.S.2d 209;   Gordon v. New York City Tr. Auth., 267 A.D.2d 201, 202, 699 N.Y.S.2d 449;  cf. Scher v. Stropoli, 7 A.D.3d 777, 776 N.Y.S.2d 870).

The plaintiff's remaining contention regarding spoliation of evidence is without merit (see generally Piazza v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 300 A.D.2d 381, 382, 753 N.Y.S.2d 86).