Carro v. Colonial Woods Condos.

178 A.D.3d 893

112 N.Y.S.3d 540 (Mem)

John CARRO, Appellant,

v.COLONIAL WOODS CONDOMINIUMS, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

2017–12193

Index No. 603839/15

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Argued—September 23, 2019

December 18, 2019

Block, O'Toole & Murphy, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Christina R. Mercado of counsel), for appellant.

Lewis Johs Avallone & Aviles, LLP, Islandia, N.Y. (Amy E. Bedell of counsel), for respondent.

Baxter, Smith & Shapiro, P.C., Hicksville, N.Y. (Tod S. Fichtelberg of counsel), for defendant Casalyn Hydro Contracting, Inc.

LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, BETSY BARROS, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (William G. Ford, J.), dated September 7, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Colonial Woods Condominiums which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs to the appellant payable by the respondent, and that branch of the respondent's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it is denied.

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when he slipped and fell on ice on the walkway abutting his two-story condominium unit in Yaphank. The plaintiff subsequently commenced this action against, among others, the defendant Colonial Woods Condominiums (hereinafter Colonial), the owner of the subject walkway. Colonial moved, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. The Supreme Court granted that branch of Colonial's motion, and the plaintiff appeals.

"A property owner will be held liable for a slip-and-fall accident involving snow and ice on its property only when it created the dangerous condition which caused the accident or had actual or constructive notice thereof" ( Castillo v. Silvercrest, 134 A.D.3d 977, 977, 24 N.Y.S.3d 86 ; see Haberman v. Meyer, 120 A.D.3d 1301, 993 N.Y.S.2d 80 ). "Thus, a defendant who moves for summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case has the initial burden of making a prima facie showing that it neither created the hazardous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence for a sufficient length of time to discover and remedy it" ( Castillo v. Silvercrest, 134 A.D.3d at 977, 24 N.Y.S.3d 86 ; see Ross v. Half Hollow Hills Cent. Sch. Dist., 153 A.D.3d 745, 746, 60 N.Y.S.3d 323 ). "To meet its initial burden on the issue of lack of constructive notice, [a] defendant must offer some evidence as to when the area in question was last cleaned or inspected relative to the time when the plaintiff fell" ( Birnbaum v. New York Racing Assn., Inc., 57 A.D.3d 598, 598–599, 869...