Opinion
2018–07852 Index No. 5198/15
07-17-2019
Eda M. GARCIA, Respondent, v. GRAYCO CORP. OF UPSTATE NEW YORK, et al., Defendants, Grayco Corp., Appellant.
Gennet Kallmann Antin Sweetman & Nichols, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Carol G. Morokoff and Donald G. Sweetman of counsel), for appellant. Subin Associates, LLP (Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York, N.Y. [Brian J. Isaac and Paul H. Seidenstock ], of counsel), for respondent.
Gennet Kallmann Antin Sweetman & Nichols, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Carol G. Morokoff and Donald G. Sweetman of counsel), for appellant.
Subin Associates, LLP (Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York, N.Y. [Brian J. Isaac and Paul H. Seidenstock ], of counsel), for respondent.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained by her when she slipped and fell on ice on the sidewalk in front of property owned by the defendant Grayco Corp. Grayco Corp., among others, moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground that the plaintiff could not establish that she fell on the sidewalk abutting its property.
We agree with the Supreme Court that Grayco Corp. failed to meet its initial burden of demonstrating its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law through evidence in admissible form, sufficient to eliminate any triable issues of fact (see Zuckerman v. City of New York , 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718 ). Accordingly, we agree with the court's determination to deny the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr. , 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642 ).
BALKIN, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, MALTESE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.