Articles Posted in Premises Liability

Winter weather creates hazardous conditions for pedestrians across New York, but not every slip and fall on snow or ice automatically gives rise to a successful personal injury claim. Property owners generally have a duty to maintain reasonably safe premises, yet New York law recognizes that they cannot always remove snow and ice while a storm is actively occurring. A recent New York ruling examined when the storm in progress doctrine shields a property owner from liability and what evidence is necessary to invoke that protection. If you suffered injuries after a winter slip and fall, you should speak with an experienced Syracuse personal injury attorney to determine whether you may have a viable claim.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff sustained injuries after slipping and falling on a sidewalk owned by the defendant commercial property owner during the morning hours following overnight snowfall. The plaintiff commenced a personal injury action, asserting that the defendant failed to maintain the sidewalk in a reasonably safe condition. Following discovery, the defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that the action should be dismissed under New York’s storm in progress doctrine because snowfall was continuing at the time of the accident and the defendant therefore had no legal duty to remove the accumulating snow or ice before the storm ended. determination.

Reportedly, the defendant relied on surveillance video showing the conditions immediately before the accident, along with testimony establishing that snow had fallen overnight and that employees had begun snow removal efforts during the early morning hours. The plaintiff argued that the evidence failed to establish the existence of an active storm sufficient to trigger the doctrine and maintained that factual disputes should have prevented dismissal of the case. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Slip and fall cases often hinge on whether a property owner knew or should have known about a dangerous condition before an accident occurred. While businesses are not automatically liable whenever a customer is injured on their premises, they have a duty to take reasonable steps to identify and address hazards that could foreseeably cause harm. A recent New York ruling illustrates how courts analyze constructive notice claims and why factual disputes regarding a property’s condition can prevent dismissal before trial. If you were injured in a fall caused by unsafe property conditions, you should speak with a Syracuse personal injury attorney about your potential claims.

Factual and Procedural Background

Allegedly, the plaintiff visited a retail store in Brooklyn on the evening of June 27, 2021. As she walked through the store’s main checkout aisle toward the guest services area, she slipped and fell. After the accident, she learned that she had fallen on a spill consisting of baby food and broken glass.

Reportedly, the hazardous condition was created approximately thirteen minutes before the accident when another customer dropped a glass jar of baby food in the main aisle. Surveillance footage captured the spill remaining on the floor during the 13-minute period leading up to the plaintiff’s fall. During that time, several customers walked through the area, and some altered their paths to avoid the spill. Continue Reading ›

Slip-and-fall cases often turn on whether a property owner had notice of a dangerous condition and whether another party can shift responsibility for maintaining the premises. In other words, when hazardous conditions persist over time, courts must determine who controlled the area. In some instances, the evidence not only demonstrates notice but also clearly establishes negligence as a matter of law, warranting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, as demonstrated in a recent New York decision. If you were injured due to unsafe property conditions, you should speak with a knowledgeable Syracuse personal injury attorney who can help you understand your legal options.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced a personal injury action after slipping and falling in a building vestibule near a freight elevator, claiming that inadequate lighting and a slippery substance caused the incident. The plaintiff asserted that the property owner failed to maintain the area in a safe condition and allowed a hazardous environment to persist.

It is alleged that the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability against the property owner, arguing that the dangerous condition was longstanding and that the owner had notice of both the lighting defect and the substance on the floor. The plaintiff supported the motion with testimony describing the dark conditions, along with photographs depicting the area and its hazards. Continue Reading ›

Claims arising from slip-and-fall incidents in residential and institutional settings often turn on a critical question: whether the property owner knew, or should have known, of a hazardous condition. A recent decision from a New York court demonstrates the evidentiary burdens placed on both sides and highlights how constructive notice, rather than actual notice, often becomes the decisive factor. If you were hurt in a slip and fall accident, you should consider consulting a Syracuse premises liability attorney to better understand how New York law applies to your situation.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff, a university student residing in on-campus housing, slipped and fell on an interior stairwell in her dormitory. She asserted that she encountered an accumulation of water while descending the stairs, causing her to lose her footing and sustain injuries. Weather conditions that day included snow, and the plaintiff described feeling a slippery substance beneath her feet just before she fell.

When pedestrians walk along city streets, they expect reasonably safe pathways. Yet, many urban areas include sections without constructed sidewalks, forcing individuals to walk on driveways, grass strips, or unpaved paths. Questions often arise regarding who bears responsibility when an injury occurs in such spaces. A recent New York opinion clarifies the limits of municipal liability under New York’s Administrative Code, illustrating that the mere absence of a sidewalk does not create a duty on the part of the City to prevent accidents. If you suffered injuries in a fall on someone else’s property, it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney about your possible claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff commenced a personal injury action against the defendant, the City of New York, alleging she sustained injuries while walking on a grassy path adjacent to a cement driveway. The plaintiff claimed her right foot struck the raised edge of the driveway, causing her to trip and fall. In her deposition, she stated that the cement driveway was approximately two inches higher than the adjoining grass and that a hole existed near the raised edge. However, she did not assert that the hole caused or contributed to her fall. Rather, she maintained that her accident resulted from the abrupt elevation difference between the grassy area and the driveway’s edge.

When tenants and visitors use staircases in apartment buildings, they expect those stairs to be reasonably safe. A single misstep can cause serious injury, and premises liability law gives injured individuals the right to pursue claims when dangerous conditions are left uncorrected. But not every uneven surface or crack will support a lawsuit. A recent decision from a New York court highlights the limits of liability, showing that minor, trivial defects are not actionable. If you have been hurt in a fall on another’s property, it is critical to consult with a Syracuse premises liability attorney who can evaluate whether the facts of your case are sufficient to establish negligence.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff brought consolidated actions against the defendants, the owner and manager of her apartment building, after she allegedly sustained injuries while descending an interior staircase. In her bills of particulars, the plaintiff stated that her fall occurred on the “B staircase between the lobby and the 1st floor on the 7th step up from the bottom.”

Allegedly, during her deposition, the plaintiff admitted she was uncertain which stairwell she used at the time of the fall, suggesting it may have been the “A” staircase instead of “B.” However, she described the route she took before the fall and identified photographs that, she claimed, accurately depicted a cracked and uneven step that caused her to trip. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff could not identify the cause of her fall without speculation and that, in any event, the alleged defect was too minor to be actionable. The trial court denied the motion, and the defendants appealed. Continue Reading ›

Slip and fall accidents happen with regularity in superstores, and in most instances, they are caused by liquid or other slippery substances that have spilled onto the ground. Store owners have an obligation under the law to maintain their premises in a safe condition, and they can be held accountable for the harm that arises out of slip and fall incidents. As explained in a recent ruling issued by a New York court, however, a store owner will only be deemed liable if the injured party can show that the owner knew or should have known of the presence of the condition that caused the fall. If you suffered injuries in a fall that happened while you were shopping, it is smart to talk to a Syracuse personal injury lawyer to evaluate whether you may be able to recover compensation in a civil lawsuit.

The Facts of the Case

Reportedly, the plaintiff was shopping at the defendant’s superstore in March 2020 when he slipped and fell in a puddle of pasta sauce in one of the store’s aisles. The sauce had not yet congealed but was still liquid at the time of the fall, and both the floor and the sauce were white. The plaintiff did not notice the sauce before he fell, and he reported that other than the puddle, the floor was clean.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a premises liability lawsuit against the defendant, alleging its negligent failure to maintain the store in a safe condition caused the plaintiff’s fall and subsequent injuries. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to show that the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the spill prior to the plaintiff’s fall. Continue Reading ›