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.
Elvia Altreche, appellant, v. City of New York, et al., respondents.
Argued—October 8, 2014
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Landicino, J.), dated December 4, 2012, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff allegedly was injured when she slipped and fell in a school. The defendant City of New York established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by showing that the accident occurred on public school premises, and that it does not operate, maintain, or control the school (see NY City Charter § 521; Education Law § 2590–b[1][a]; Myers v. City of New York, 64 AD3d 546, 547; Leacock v. City of New York, 61 AD3d 827, 827; Bleiberg v. City of New York, 43 AD3d 969, 971). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
With respect to the cause of action asserted against the defendant Department of Education of the City of New York (hereinafter the DOE), the defendants submitted evidence sufficient to establish, prima facie, that the DOE neither created the alleged wet condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence for a sufficient length of time to discover and remedy it (see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 837–838; Zerilli v. Western Beef Retail, Inc., 72 AD3d 681, 681). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the DOE “was not required to cover all of its floors with mats, nor to continuously mop up all moisture resulting from tracked-in rain” (Negron v. St. Patrick's Nursing Home, 248 A.D.2d 687, 687; see Naulo v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 71 AD3d 651, 651).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ENG, P.J., DILLON, DUFFY and BARROS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of 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.
Docket No: 2013–04503 (Index No. 19988 /09)
Decided: November 05, 2014
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)