Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff failed or was unable to identify the cause of her fall down the stairs of the defendants' premises ( see Tejada v. Jonas, 17 AD3d 448; Rodriguez v. Cafaro, 17 AD3d 658; Arbusto v. Amerada Hess Corp., 16 AD3d 527, 528; Curran v. Esposito, 308 AD2d 428, 429; Hartman v. Mountain Val. Brew Pub, 301 AD2d 570). In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff failed to present evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to the cause of the injury. "Since it is just as likely that the accident could have been caused by some other factor, such as a misstep or loss of balance, any determination by the trier of fact as to the cause of the accident would be based upon sheer speculation" ( Teplitskaya v. 3096 Corp., 289 AD2d 477, 478).
The parties' remaining contentions are without merit.