From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cantalupo v. John Anthony's Water Cafe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 5, 2001
281 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Summary

holding that the plaintiff's testimony that she observed the puddle fifteen-to-twenty minutes before she fell was insufficient on its own to create a triable issue of fact as to visibility

Summary of this case from Urrutia v. Target Corp.

Opinion

Argued February 9, 2001.

March 5, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated October 29, 1999, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Marcowitz Corring, PLLC, New York, N.Y. (Edward L. C. Marcowitz of counsel), for appellants.

Steven G. Fauth, New York, N.Y. (Martin J. Moskowitz of counsel), for respondent.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Gloria Cantalupo allegedly slipped and fell on a puddle on the dance floor at the defendant's catering hall. The plaintiffs contend that the defendant had constructive notice of this alleged dangerous condition because the plaintiffs noticed the puddle 15 or 20 minutes before the accident.

Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, that evidence is insufficient for a trier of fact to infer that the defendant had constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition (see, Hartmann v. H.K.E. Realty Corp., 228 A.D.2d 558). "Constructive notice requires proof that a defect was visible and apparent and that it existed for a sufficient length of time before the accident to permit the defendant's employees to discover and remedy it" (Fox v. Kamal Corp., 271 A.D.2d 485; see, Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 837). In this case, there is no evidence that the alleged puddle on an 800-square-foot crowded dance floor was visible and apparent to the defendant's employees at any time before the accident. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.


Summaries of

Cantalupo v. John Anthony's Water Cafe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 5, 2001
281 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

holding that the plaintiff's testimony that she observed the puddle fifteen-to-twenty minutes before she fell was insufficient on its own to create a triable issue of fact as to visibility

Summary of this case from Urrutia v. Target Corp.

rejecting plaintiffs' contention that defendant had constructive notice of puddle because plaintiff noticed puddle 15 or 20 minutes before the accident and granting defendant summary judgment because there was no evidence that the alleged puddle was visible and apparent to the defendant's employees at any time before accident

Summary of this case from MacKinney v. Burger King Corporation
Case details for

Cantalupo v. John Anthony's Water Cafe

Case Details

Full title:GLORIA CANTALUPO, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. JOHN ANTHONY'S WATER CAFE, INC.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 5, 2001

Citations

281 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
721 N.Y.S.2d 397

Citing Cases

Yioves v. T.J. Maxx, Inc.

Here, the defendant did not satisfy its initial burden. The defendant failed to submit evidence sufficient to…

Urrutia v. Target Corp.

While courts do not discount a plaintiff's post-accident observations about the visibility of the hazard,…