From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ayala v. City of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 5, 2021
198 A.D.3d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

14293 Index No. 23814/17E Case No. 2021–00129

10-05-2021

Sophia AYALA, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant–Appellant, CP Associates LLC, et al., Defendants.

Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel, New York (Benjamin H. Pollak of counsel), for appellant. Burns & Harris, New York (Daniel T. Wright of counsel), for respondent.


Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel, New York (Benjamin H. Pollak of counsel), for appellant.

Burns & Harris, New York (Daniel T. Wright of counsel), for respondent.

Webber, J.P., Singh, Scarpulla, Mendez, Rodriguez, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mitchell J. Danziger, J.), entered December 2, 2020, which denied the branch of defendant City of New York's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that there was a storm in progress at the time of plaintiff's slip and fall, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint.

Defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff slipped and fell on snow or ice on the sidewalk abutting its premises. Defendant submitted certified climatological records showing that there was a winter storm in progress at the time of plaintiff's fall thereby suspending its duty to take reasonable measures to remedy dangerous conditions caused by the storm (see De Jesus v. Roban Corp., 183 A.D.3d 497, 498, 122 N.Y.S.3d 513 [1st Dept. 2020] ; Rosario v. New York City Hous. Auth., 173 A.D.3d 594, 595, 100 N.Y.S.3d 868 [1st Dept. 2019] ).

In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact. The printouts that she submitted from a weather reporting website were not certified, are therefore inadmissible, and cannot be considered (see Morabito v. 11 Park Place LLC, 107 A.D.3d 472, 472, 967 N.Y.S.2d 694 [1st Dept. 2013] ). Plaintiff also failed to provide any evidence to support her speculative theory that the ice she slipped on was old or preexisting (see Sow v. Fedcap Rehabilitative Servs., Inc., 160 A.D.3d 604, 604, 75 N.Y.S.3d 169 [1st Dept. 2018] ).


Summaries of

Ayala v. City of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 5, 2021
198 A.D.3d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Ayala v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:Sophia AYALA, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 5, 2021

Citations

198 A.D.3d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
152 N.Y.S.3d 308

Citing Cases

Bender v. Lowe's Home Ctrs.

But Williams and Mentkowski considered data from similar sources, see supra at 6, so the Court rejects that…