In light of the deposition testimony indicating that defendant's superintendent may have had actual notice of the spill of liquid detergent on the lobby floor of defendant's building as much as half-an-hour prior to plaintiff's accident, and in light of the deponents' descriptions of that spill, the IAS court properly found triable issues with respect to whether defendant had either actual or constructive notice of the hazard, as well as whether, if defendant did have notice of the hazard, its remedial measures were adequate (see, e.g., El-Taher v. Mem. Hosp. for Cancer and Allied Diseases, 266 A.D.2d 92; 698 N.Y.S.2d 470).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.