Summary judgment awarded in slip and fall case
A Supreme Court, Kings County, judge granted a cleaning contractor's summary judgment motion in a case arising from a woman’s claim that she slipped and fell while maintenance personnel were mopping the floor in an elevator lobby near her office.
The contractor’s motion was based on two arguments: first, that it did not owe a duty to plaintiff because it did not launch a force or instrument of harm; that plaintiff did not detrimentally rely on the contractor's performance of its duties in the building; and that it did not completely assume the owner's duty to safely maintain the building. The contractor also argued that even if it did owe a duty to plaintiff, it took all necessary precautions to warn plaintiff that the floor was being mopped.
In granting the contractor's motion, the Court observed that "a wet hallway floor is readily observable by a reasonable use of the senses and the condition of a floor being mopped is not an inherently dangerous condition." The Court therefore agreed with the contractor's position that it did not owe a duty to plaintiff and dismissed the complaint.
The motion papers were prepared by David H. Motola, Stewart G. Milch and Alexis E. Trezza, and the motion was argued by Mr. Milch.
Ramsey v. Temco Service Industries, Inc., ___ Misc.3d ___, ___ N.Y.S.2d ___ (Sup. Ct. Kings Cty 2016)
Attorneys |
|---|
| David H. Motola |
