From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Prame v. Ames Department Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 4, 1991
176 A.D.2d 1215 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

October 4, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.

Present — Doerr, J.P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendants summary judgment and dismissed plaintiffs' complaint seeking damages for injuries sustained in a slip and fall accident. There is no evidence that defendants had actual or constructive notice of the defective condition that allegedly caused the accident (see, Anderson v Klein's Foods, 73 N.Y.2d 835, rearg denied 73 N.Y.2d 918; Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836; Negri v Stop Shop, 65 N.Y.2d 625). Plaintiffs' reliance upon the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is inappropriate and misplaced. Plaintiffs did not make that argument before Supreme Court and should not now be permitted to make it for the first time on appeal (see, Arvantides v Arvantides, 106 A.D.2d 853, mod 64 N.Y.2d 1033). In any event, res ipsa loquitur is not applicable on the facts presented (see, Dermatossian v New York City Tr. Auth., 67 N.Y.2d 219, 227-228).


Summaries of

Prame v. Ames Department Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 4, 1991
176 A.D.2d 1215 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Prame v. Ames Department Stores, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:GOLDIE PRAME et al., Appellants, v. AMES DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Oct 4, 1991

Citations

176 A.D.2d 1215 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
576 N.Y.S.2d 711

Citing Cases

Brown v. Poway Unified School Dist.

tions see, for example, Ex parte Travis (Ala. 1982) 414 So.2d 956, 958; Foster v. Kwik Chek Super Markets,…

Anderson v. 35 West 23rd Street Condominium

Furthermore, there is no evidence that the defendant had actual notice of a foreign substance or allegedly…