From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Franco v. Supermarkets Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 16, 2006
34 A.D.3d 328 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

9511.

November 16, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered November 3, 2005, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.


In response to defendant's prima facie showing, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to notice. "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 defendant's employees to discover and remedy it" ( Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837). The evidence offered by plaintiff was insufficient to establish how the "gooky" substance got on the floor or how long it had been there before the accident ( see Strowman v Great Ail. Pac. Tea Co., 252 AD2d 384). We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them without merit.


Summaries of

Franco v. Supermarkets Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 16, 2006
34 A.D.3d 328 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Franco v. Supermarkets Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES A. FRANCO, Appellant, v. D'AGOSTINO SUPERMARKETS, INC., Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 16, 2006

Citations

34 A.D.3d 328 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8341
824 N.Y.S.2d 269

Citing Cases

Kucevic v. D'Agostino Supermarkets, Inc.

In addition, the First Department has held that to maintain a premises liability action against a grocery…

Gutierrez v. New York City

Summary judgment was properly denied in this action where plaintiff was injured when she tripped and fell…