Opinion
2014-12-24
Silvia AGUILA, appellant, v. FOX HILLS PARTNERS, LLC, et al., respondents.
Soren & Soren (Marvin Ben–Aron, Staten Island, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant. Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP (Gannon, Rosenfarb, Balletti & Drossman, New York, N.Y. [Lisa L. Gokhulsingh], of counsel), for respondents.
Soren & Soren (Marvin Ben–Aron, Staten Island, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant. Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP (Gannon, Rosenfarb, Balletti & Drossman, New York, N.Y. [Lisa L. Gokhulsingh], of counsel), for respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Minardo, J.), dated June 21, 2013, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that they did not create the allegedly dangerous condition of accumulated water on the lobby floor upon which the plaintiff slipped and fell, or have actual or constructive notice of the condition ( see Paduano v. 686 Forest Ave., LLC, 119 A.D.3d 845, 989 N.Y.S.2d 379; Sarandrea v. St. Charles Sch., 118 A.D.3d 690, 986 N.Y.S.2d 351; Orlov v. BFP 245 Park Co., LLC, 84 A.D.3d 764, 922 N.Y.S.2d 479; Babb v. Marshalls of MA, Inc., 78 A.D.3d 976, 911 N.Y.S.2d 640; Perlongo v. Park City 3 & 4 Apts., Inc., 31 A.D.3d 409, 818 N.Y.S.2d 158; Murphy v. Lawrence Towers Apts., LLC, 15 A.D.3d 371, 789 N.Y.S.2d 532). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The defendants were not required to cover all of the floor with mats or continuously mop up all moisture resulting from tracked-in rain ( see Paduano v. 686 Forest Ave., LLC, 119 A.D.3d at 845–846, 989 N.Y.S.2d 379; Sarandrea v. St. Charles Sch., 118 A.D.3d at 691, 986 N.Y.S.2d 351; Naulo v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 71 A.D.3d 651, 896 N.Y.S.2d 155; Negron v. St. Patrick's Nursing Home, 248 A.D.2d 687, 671 N.Y.S.2d 275). Moreover, “[a] general awareness that water might be tracked into a building when it rains is insufficient to impute to the defendants constructive notice of the particular dangerous condition” (Musante v. Department of Educ. of City of N.Y., 97 A.D.3d 731, 731, 949 N.Y.S.2d 104; see Yearwood v. Cushman & Wakefield, 294 A.D.2d 568, 742 N.Y.S.2d 661).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HALL and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.