Hassan v. Pergament Home Ctr.

• Decision Date: 18 December 2000
• Citation: 718 N.Y.S.2d 623
• Parties: (A.D. 2 Dept. 2000) Alyah Hassan, appellant, v. Pergament Home Center, Inc., et al., respondents. 2000-01966 : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 623

718 N.Y.S.2d 623 (A.D. 2 Dept. 2000)

Alyah Hassan, appellant, v. Pergament Home Center, Inc., et al., respondents.

2000-01966

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

December 18, 2000.

Avrohom Becker (Ephrem Wertenteil, New York, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant.

Gordon & Silber, P.C., New York, N.Y. (David H. Sculnick and Daniella S. Pessah of counsel), for respondents.

BRACKEN, J.P., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lisa, J.), dated January 11, 2000, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In a slip and fall case, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendants created the dangerous condition which caused the accident or that the defendants had actual or constructive notice of that condition and failed to remedy it within a reasonable time (see, Mercer v. City of New York, 88 N.Y.2d 955; Lewis v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 64 N.Y.2d 670; Birthwright v. Mid-City Sec., 268 A.D.2d 401). With respect to constructive notice, a defect must be visible and apparent, and it must exist for a sufficient length of time before the accident to permit a defendant's employees to discover and remedy it (see, Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 837). The defendants met their initial burden of demonstrating their entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law. In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff failed to come forward with sufficient admissible evidence to raise an issue of fact (see, Williams v. Waldbaums Supermarkets, 236 A.D.2d 605; Masotti v. Waldbaums Supennarket, 227 A.D.2d 532; Gottlieb v. Waldbaum's Supermarket, 226 A.D.2d 344; Kraemer v. K-Mart Corp., 226 A.D.2d 590). Accordingly, the defendants' motion for summary judgment was properly granted.

BRACKEN, J.P., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN and FLORIO, JJ., concur.