Granillo v. Toys "R" US, Inc.
| Decision Date | 27 April 2010 |
| Citation | 899 N.Y.S.2d 377,72 A.D.3d 1024 |
| Parties | Mayra GRANILLO, respondent, v. TOYS "R" US, INC., et al., appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
72 A.D.3d 1024
Mayra GRANILLO, respondent,
v.
TOYS "R" US, INC., et al., appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
April 27, 2010.
McAndrew, Conboy & Prisco, LLP, Woodbury, N.Y. (Mary C. Azzaretto of counsel), for appellants.
Paul Carmona & Associates, PLLC, Brewster, N.Y., for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, ARIEL E. BELEN, CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Lefkowitz, J.), entered November 19, 2009, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
On July 2, 2004, the plaintiff was shopping in a Toys "R" Us store in Yonkers owned and operated by the defendants. As she walked toward the exit, she fell, allegedly sustaining injuries. Immediately after her fall, she observed melted or melting ice cream on the floor near where she fell, which condition allegedly caused her to slip and fall. The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries. The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The Supreme Court denied the defendants' motion. We affirm.
" 'A defendant who moves for summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case has the initial burden of making a prima facie showing that it neither created the hazardous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence for a sufficient length of time to discover and remedy it' " ( Aguirre v. Paul, 54 A.D.3d 302, 303, 862 N.Y.S.2d 580, quoting Prusak v. New York City Hous. Auth., 43 A.D.3d 1022, 1022, 841 N.Y.S.2d 455; see Lewis v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 64 N.Y.2d 670, 671, 485 N.Y.S.2d 252, 474 N.E.2d 612). " 'A defendant has constructive notice of a defect when it is visible and apparent, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beck v. Stewart's Shops Corp.
...to when the area in question was last cleaned or inspected relative to the time when the plaintiff fell" ( Granillo v. Toys "R" Us, Inc., 72 A.D.3d 1024, 1025, 899 N.Y.S.2d 377 [2010] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Sosa v. Golub Corp., 273 A.D.2d 762, 765, 710 N.Y.S.2d......
-
Villano v. Strathmore Terrace Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
...as to whether their employees lacked either actual or constructive notice of the defective sprinkler head ( see Granillo v. Toys "R" Us, Inc., 72 A.D.3d 1024, 899 N.Y.S.2d 377; Molloy v. Waldbaum, Inc., 72 A.D.3d 659, 897 N.Y.S.2d 653). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the def......
-
Losito v. JP Morgan Chase and Co.
... ... Carter Community Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., 40 A.D.3d at 813, 835 N.Y.S.2d 731; Dick v. Gap, Inc., 16 A.D.3d 615, 792 N.Y.S.2d 194). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the ... ...
-
Pollina v. Oakland's Rest., Inc.
...715, 715, 877 N.Y.S.2d 94, quoting Sloane v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 49 A.D.3d 522, 523, 855 N.Y.S.2d 155;see Granillo v. Toys “R” Us, Inc., 72 A.D.3d 1024, 1025, 899 N.Y.S.2d 377). Here, the defendants sustained this burden by submitting the transcript of the deposition testimony of the ma......