WALSH v. MURPHY

In view of the fact that the evidence permits no more than speculation as to the cause of plaintiff's fall down defendants' staircase, the IAS court properly granted defendants summary relief (see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). Also proper was the IAS court's denial of plaintiff's motion to renew since plaintiff's submission of a medical affidavit as to her loss of memory of the accident did not in any way ameliorate the fatal evidentiary deficiency. Contrary to plaintiff's argument, theNoseworthy doctrine (see, Noseworthy v. City of New York, 298 N.Y. 76, 80-81) is not applicable to this case, since defendants' knowledge as to the cause of plaintiff's fall is no greater than that of plaintiff (see, Lynn v. Lynn, 216 A.D.2d 194, 195).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.