Opinion
1324 CA 18–01052
02-01-2019
Michael P. GARRETT, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. 1030 EAST GENESEE COMPANY, LLC, Defendant–Appellant, et al., Defendants.
LAW OFFICES OF THERESA J. PULEO, SYRACUSE (MICHELLE M. DAVOLI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. JOHN J. FROMEN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, P.C., BUFFALO (THOMAS J. GRILLO, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT.
LAW OFFICES OF THERESA J. PULEO, SYRACUSE (MICHELLE M. DAVOLI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
JOHN J. FROMEN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, P.C., BUFFALO (THOMAS J. GRILLO, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND CURRAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDERIt is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries he sustained when he fell in an allegedly icy parking lot owned by defendant-appellant (defendant). Defendant now appeals from an order that, inter alia, denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it. We affirm. Supreme Court properly denied the motion because defendant failed to meet its initial burden of establishing that its agent's snow removal efforts did not create or exacerbate the icy conditions that allegedly caused plaintiff's fall (see Morris v. Home Depot USA, 152 A.D.3d 669, 670–671, 59 N.Y.S.3d 92 [2d Dept. 2017] ).