DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.
The plaintiff allegedly sustained injuries when she slipped and fell on ice on the exterior steps located in front of her apartment door in the Talleyrand Crescent apartment complex. She commenced this action against, among others, Talleyrand Management, LLC (hereinafter Talleyrand), the on-site management entity for the Talleyrand Crescent apartments. The Supreme Court denied Talleyrand's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it. We reverse.
In opposition to Talleyrand's prima facie demonstration of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact, inter alia, as to whether Talleyrand had actual or constructive notice of the icy condition (see Voss v. D C Parking, 299 A.D.2d 346; Simmonds v. Long Is. R.R. Co., 296 A.D.2d 487). A finding that the subject ice patch existed for a sufficient length of time for Talleyrand to have discovered and remedied it would be based on speculation (see Penny v. Pembrook Mgt., 280 A.D.2d 590; Sellet v. United Artists Theaters, 251 A.D.2d 488; Bertman v. Board of Mgrs. of Omni Ct. Condominium I, 233 A.D.2d 283).
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, SCHMIDT and ADAMS, JJ., concur.