Opinion
6525 Index 155112/15
05-10-2018
Rivkin Radler LLP, Uniondale (Stuart M. Bodoff of counsel), for appellant. Saftler & Bacher, PLLC, New York (James W. Bacher of counsel), for respondent.
Rivkin Radler LLP, Uniondale (Stuart M. Bodoff of counsel), for appellant.
Saftler & Bacher, PLLC, New York (James W. Bacher of counsel), for respondent.
Friedman, J.P., Tom, Kapnick, Kahn, Kern, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2017, which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted, and the complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Plaintiff alleges that she slipped and fell on a pathway on defendant Columbia University's campus, which was covered by snow over a layer of ice. Defendant established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by submitting certified climatological data showing that a storm was in progress at the time of plaintiff's fall so that its duty to take reasonable measures to remedy dangerous conditions caused by the storm was suspended (see Valentine v. City of New York, 86 A.D.2d 381, 383, 449 N.Y.S.2d 991 [1st Dept. 1982], affd 57 N.Y.2d 932, 457 N.Y.S.2d 240, 443 N.E.2d 488 [1982] ; Kinberg v. New York City Tr. Auth., 99 A.D.3d 583, 952 N.Y.S.2d 540 [1st Dept. 2012] ; Pippo v. City of New York, 43 A.D.3d 303, 304, 842 N.Y.S.2d 367 [1st Dept. 2007] ).
In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The opinion of plaintiff's expert was too speculative to raise an issue of fact as to whether defendant's snow removal efforts involved insufficient salt or ice melt materials, resulting in the creation of new ice that was covered by the snow (see Rivas v. New York City Hous. Auth., 140 A.D.3d 580, 581, 34 N.Y.S.3d 443 [1st Dept. 2016] ; Bi Fang Zhou v. 131 Chrystie St. Realty Corp., 125 A.D.3d 429, 430, 3 N.Y.S.3d 21 [1st Dept. 2015] ).