AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

PHYLLIS KLOR, ET AL., appellants, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, ET AL., respondents.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint by showing that they neither created an unsafe condition nor had actual or constructive notice thereof (see Rajgopaul v. Toys "R" Us, 297 A.D.2d 728; O'Callaghan v. Great Atl. Pac. Tea Co., 294 A.D.2d 416). In response, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact because they submitted no proof, only speculation, as to what actually may have caused the fall in question (see Rajgopaul v. Toys "R" Us, supra; Marcelle v. New York City Tr. Auth., 289 A.D.2d 459; Pianforini v. Kelties Bum Steer, 258 A.D.2d 634). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

RITTER, J.P., SMITH, GOLDSTEIN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KLOR v. AMERICAN AIRLINES
(May 19, 2003)