Given the absence of notice to defendants, the mere fact that the surface of defendants' cellar door was slippery when wet is insufficient to raise a triable issue as to negligence (see, Wasserstrom v. New York City Tr. Auth., 267 A.D.2d 36, 37, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 761). The expert affidavit offered by plaintiff was properly given no weight, since the expert's opinion that safety required more than the familiar raised treads on the metal cellar door was not supported by non-conclusory reference to specific, currently applicable safety standards or practices (see, Cornwell v. Otis Elevator Co., 275 A.D.2d 649; Mosher v. Town of Oppenheim, 263 A.D.2d 605, 606).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.