DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs payable by the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs, the defendants' motion and the third-party defendant's cross motion are denied, and the complaint and the third-party complaint are reinstated.
While shopping at the defendant Waldbaum, Inc. (hereinafter Waldbaum), the plaintiff slipped on a two-foot puddle of water that had accumulated from a drip out of the bottom of a seafood display case filled with crushed ice. The court granted Waldbaum's motion and the cross motion of the third-party defendant Koldaire Refrigeration Corp. for summary judgment finding that the plaintiff could not prove either actual or constructive notice to the defendants of the water on the supermarket floor. We disagree.
Neither Waldbaum nor Koldaire established its prima facie entitlement to judgment because they have failed in the first instance to properly address the issue of notice ( see, e.g., Padula v. Big V Supermarkets, 173 A.D.2d 1094; see also, Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853). In any event, in her opposition to the motion and cross motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff demonstrated that there were triable issues of fact as to whether the defendants had actual and/or constructive notice of the leak to correct the condition before the plaintiff's fall ( see, e.g., DiFranco v. Golub Corp., 241 A.D.2d 901; Johnson v. Hallam Enters., 208 A.D.2d 1110; Ferlito v. Great S. Bay Assocs., 140 A.D.2d 408; LaRose v. Amazon Assocs., 139 A.D.2d 568).
JOY, J.P., FRIEDMANN, GOLDSTEIN, and McGINITY, JJ., concur.