From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Supermarkets General Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 1994
205 A.D.2d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Summary

affirming grant of summary judgment where plaintiff, who slipped and fell in defendant's store, failed to rebut defendant's showing that it did not have notice of the alleged dangerous condition

Summary of this case from Boyko v. Sam's Club-Members Only

Opinion

June 27, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Esther Davis allegedly slipped and fell on a "reddish-type substance" in the defendant's store. She and her husband commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for injuries allegedly sustained as a result of her fall. The defendant subsequently moved for summary judgment on the ground that it had neither actual nor constructive notice of the existence of the defect which allegedly caused Ms. Davis to fall, and therefore could not be held liable for injuries allegedly sustained as a result of that fall. The Supreme Court granted the defendant's motion, and we affirm.

"To constitute constructive notice, a defect must be visible and apparent and it must exist for a sufficient length of time prior to the accident to permit the defendant's employees to discover and remedy it (Negri v. Stop Shop, 65 N.Y.2d 625, 626; Lewis v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 64 N.Y.2d 670, affg on opn at 99 A.D.2d 246, 249)" (Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, 837-838). The defendant met its burden of establishing its lack of awareness of the existence of a defect at the time and place of the occurrence. In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to adduce any evidence to the effect that anyone, including Ms. Davis herself, saw the substance on the floor prior to the fall. Indeed, the first time that Ms. Davis noticed any such substance on the floor was after she had fallen and was lying on the floor. Moreover, absent any testimony that the reddish substance was dirty, had foot steps on it, or had been tracked through, a jury could not reasonably infer that the substance had been on the floor for any appreciable length of time to permit the defendant's employees to discover and remedy it (see, Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836, supra). Accordingly, we find that, as a matter of law, the plaintiffs failed to rebut the defendant's showing that it had neither actual nor constructive notice of the alleged defect (see, Kanarskee v. Pergament Distribs., 201 A.D.2d 704), and summary judgment was properly granted to the defendant. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Davis v. Supermarkets General Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 1994
205 A.D.2d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

affirming grant of summary judgment where plaintiff, who slipped and fell in defendant's store, failed to rebut defendant's showing that it did not have notice of the alleged dangerous condition

Summary of this case from Boyko v. Sam's Club-Members Only
Case details for

Davis v. Supermarkets General Corporation

Case Details

Full title:ESTHER DAVIS et al., Appellants, v. SUPERMARKETS GENERAL CORPORATION…

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

Date published: Jun 27, 1994

Citations

205 A.D.2d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
613 N.Y.S.2d 701

Citing Cases

Moss v. JNK Capital Ltd.

The plaintiff contends that because two employees of the respondent were working in the vicinity of the plum,…

Wauters v. Shop Rite, Inc.

The plaintiff commenced the instant action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained when…