PEDERSEN v. KAR LTD

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Frances PEDERSEN, Appellant, v. KAR, LTD., d/b/a Rooms Unlimited, Respondent.

Decided: May 29, 2001

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN and THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ. Gerald L. Lotto (Sweetbaum & Sweetbaum, Lake Success, N.Y. [Marshall D. Sweetbaum] of counsel), for appellant. Torino & Bernstein, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Eva J. Tompkins of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hall, J.), entered December 18, 2000, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

 The plaintiff fell off a furniture display platform, approximately eight inches high, having just stepped up onto the platform from the opposite side.   On its motion for summary judgment the defendant established that the platform was clearly visible, and that the plaintiff was not looking where she was going just before she fell.   A property owner has no duty to warn of dangers that are readily observable by the reasonable use of one's senses (see, Canetti v. AMCI, 381 A.D.2d 281, 721 N.Y.S.2d 398;  Connor v. Taylor Rental Ctr., 278 A.D.2d 270, 718 N.Y.S.2d 605;  Speirs v. Dick's Clothing & Sporting Goods, 268 A.D.2d 581, 702 N.Y.S.2d 842;  Breem v. Long Is. Lighting Co., 256 A.D.2d 294, 680 N.Y.S.2d 674;  Wint v. Fulton St. Art Gallery, 263 A.D.2d 541, 694 N.Y.S.2d 97;  Binensztok v. Marshall Stores, 228 A.D.2d 534, 644 N.Y.S.2d 333).   The plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact in opposition to the defendant's prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.   Accordingly, the defendant's motion was properly granted.

SANTUCCI, J.P., LUCIANO, FEUERSTEIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

Copied to clipboard