Fernandez v. State

• Decision Date: 01 July 2015
• Docket Number: 2014-00515
• Citation: 2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 05638,130 A.D.3d 566,14 N.Y.S.3d 49
• Parties: Ramon FERNANDEZ, et al., appellants, v. STATE of New York, respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

130 A.D.3d 566

14 N.Y.S.3d 49

2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 05638

Ramon FERNANDEZ, et al., appellants

v.STATE of New York, respondent.

2014-00515

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

July 1, 2015.

Dell & Dean, PLLC(Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York, N.Y. [Scott T. Horn and Naomi M. Taub ], of counsel), for appellants.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Mark H. Shawhan of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., L. PRISCILLA HALL, LEONARD B. AUSTIN and SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the claimants appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Sise, J.), dated October 29, 2013, which, upon a decision of the same court dated September 13, 2013, made after a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, is in favor of the defendant and against them dismissing the claim.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

On February 14, 2007, shortly after 3:00 p.m., the claimantRamon Fernandez(hereinafter the injured claimant) allegedly sustained injuries when he slipped and fell while walking down a path at the Stony Brook University Hospital.Climatological records showed that it had started snowing the evening before the accident happened and that the snow turned into a mix of sleet and freezing rain, lasting into the early evening on February 14, 2007.

The injured claimant, and his wife suing derivatively, commenced this claim against the defendant, State of New York, as the owner of the property.The claim proceeded to a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, after which a judgment was entered in favor of the defendant and against the claimants dismissing the claim.

In reviewing a determination made after a nonjury trial, the power of the Appellate Division is as broad as that of the trial court, and this Court may render the judgment it finds “warranted by the facts,” bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses (Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v. Town of Bedford,

60 N.Y.2d 492, 499, 470 N.Y.S.2d 350, 458 N.E.2d 809;seeSteenbuck v. State of New York,111 A.D.3d 819, 975 N.Y.S.2d 348;Perriello v. State of New York,106 A.D.3d 797, 964 N.Y.S.2d 624 ).“In order to prevail at trial in a negligence case, a [claimant] must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant's negligence was a proximate cause of [claimant's] injuries.A [claimant] is not required to exclude every other possible cause, but need only offer evidence from which proximate cause may be reasonably inferred” (Burgos v. Aqueduct Realty Corp.,92 N.Y.2d 544, 550, 684 N.Y.S.2d 139, 706 N.E.2d 1163;see Simo v. New York City Tr. Auth.,

13 A.D.3d 609, 611, 788 N.Y.S.2d 145 ).

Here, the Court of Claims' determination that the claimants failed to establish the existence of a dangerous condition created by the defendant which...