Larsen v. Congregation B'Nai Jeshurun of Staten Island
| Decision Date | 09 May 2006 |
| Docket Number | 2005-01724. |
| Citation | 2006 NY Slip Op 03732,815 N.Y.S.2d 187,29 A.D.3d 643 |
| Parties | RUTH ANN LARSEN, Appellant, v. CONGREGATION B'NAI JESHURUN OF STATEN ISLAND, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. EXCLUSIVE CATERING BY KAPLAN, INC., Third-Party Defendant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.
To prove a prima facie case of negligence in a trip-and-fall case, a plaintiff is required to show that the defendant created the condition which caused the accident or that the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the condition (see Cruceta v Funnel Equities, Inc., 18 AD3d 693, 694 [2005]; Nicklas v Tedlen Realty Corp., 305 AD2d 385, 386 [2003]). A defendant has constructive notice of a defect when the defect is visible and apparent, and existed for a sufficient length of time before the accident that it could have been discovered and corrected (see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837-838 [1986]; Negri v Stop & Shop, 65 NY2d 625, 626 [1985]; Golding v Powell & Dempsey, 247 AD2d 510 [1998]).
The defendant met its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that it neither created nor had actual or constructive notice of the allegedly defective floor mat at issue. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff in opposition failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the section of the mat that allegedly caused the accident had become buckled or elevated before the accident, or that the defendant had constructive notice of this allegedly defective condition. Although the plaintiff presented evidence that actual notice of the allegedly defective condition had been given to Mel Kaplan and Stacie Kaplan, the principals of her employer, she failed to present evidence of a connection between the Kaplans and the defendant sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the actual notice given to the Kaplans could be imputed to the defendant (see Torres v New York City Hous. Auth., 261 AD2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Abrams v. Berelson
...see Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 501 N.Y.S.2d 646, 492 N.E.2d 774; Larsen v. Congregation B'Nai Jeshurun of Staten Is., 29 A.D.3d 643, 815 N.Y.S.2d 187). Although the presence of a loaded gun may constitute a dangerous condition, under the circumstances of th......
-
Susan Vitiello v. Aldrich Mgmt. Co.
...See Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 501 N.Y.S.2d 646 (1986); Larsen v. Congregation B'Nai Jeshurun of Staten Island, 29 A.D.3d 643, 815 N.Y.S.2d 187 (2d Dept. 2006). As a general rule, liability for a dangerous condition on real property must be predicated upon ......
-
Stewart v. Town of Hempstead
...corrected. (Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 68 N.Y.2d 836 [1986]; Larsen v. Congregation B'Nai Jehurun of Staten Island, 29 A.D.3d 643 [2nd Dept 2006]), Both the County of Nassau and Town of Hempstead deny that the had prior written notice of the condition complained of the Pl......
-
Bihari v. Kmart Corp.
...it could have been discovered and corrected ( see Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, supra; Larsen v. Congregation B'Nai Jeshurun of Staten Is., 29 A.D.3d 643 [2nd Dept 2006]). A defendant demonstrates lack of constructive notice by producing evidence of its maintenance activitie......