Opinion
8240 Index 303933/12
01-29-2019
Jacqueline AMBERSLEY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. ATHLETA LLC, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Kerner & Kerner, P.C., New York (Kenneth T. Kerner of counsel), for appellant. McAndrew, Conboy & Prisco, LLP, Melville (Mary C. Azzaretto of counsel), for respondents.
Kerner & Kerner, P.C., New York (Kenneth T. Kerner of counsel), for appellant.
McAndrew, Conboy & Prisco, LLP, Melville (Mary C. Azzaretto of counsel), for respondents.
Renwick, J.P., Richter, Mazzarelli, Webber, Kern, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sharon A.M. Aarons, J.), entered March 18, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendants established entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action where plaintiff was injured when she walked into a transparent glass door while exiting defendant Athleta's retail store. Defendants submitted evidence showing that the glare of the sun was the cause of plaintiff's accident. Notably, plaintiff testified that as she was leaving the store, the sun was in her face, and that she took two steps and confronted a door that she did not expect (see Benitez v. Olson , 6 A.D.3d 560, 561–562, 774 N.Y.S.2d 827 [2d Dept. 2004], lv denied in part, dismissed in part 3 N.Y.3d 753, 788 N.Y.S.2d 662, 821 N.E.2d 966 [2004] ; see also Rios v. Gristedes Delivery Serv. Inc. , 69 A.D.3d 499, 893 N.Y.S.2d 538 [1st Dept. 2010] ).
In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Although her expert opined that the absence of eye level markings on the exit doors constituted negligence, plaintiff failed to demonstrate how such markings would have prevented her injuries.
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.