Fernandez v Paradigm Mgt. Group, LLC

Annotate this Case
[*1] Fernandez v Paradigm Mgt. Group, LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 51632(U) Decided on September 1, 2011 Supreme Court, Queens County Markey, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on September 1, 2011
Supreme Court, Queens County

Natalia Fernandez, Plaintiff,

against

Paradigm Management Group, LLC, et al., Defendants.



23773/2009

 

Appearances of Counsel:

For the Plaintiff: Larry Hallock, Esq., 334 Deer Park Ave., Babylon Village, New York 11702

For Defendants: Hardin, Kundla, McKeon & Poletto, by David B. Datny, Esq., 110 William Street, New York, NY 10038

Charles J. Markey, J.



The following papers numbered were read on this motion:

Notices of Motion, Affirm., Exhibits..............................................................1 & 2

Affirmations in Opposition..............................................................................3

Affirmations in Reply.......................................................................................4

Charles J. Markey, J.:

The facts of this slip-and-fall case occurred on May 15, 2009, at 9:30 P.M., when salespersons, including the plaintiff, attended an event sponsored by Coors Light, the beer company, at M2 Ultra Lounge, a nightclub in Manhattan. After exiting the women's restroom, the plaintiff slipped on stairs that allegedly had water and ice. She did not notice any water and ice when she ascended the staircase on her way to the restroom.

The defendants have assembled, on their motion for summary judgment, compelling evidence warranting the granting of the motion. Included in the moving submission was an affidavit from Scott Rice, who is a consultant for defendant 530 W. 28th Street, L.P., doing business as M2 Ultra Lounge. Rice, by affidavit sworn to on April 27, 2011, avers that he did a complete check of the premises at 8:00 P.M. that evening, and, during his "walk through" - - done 90 minutes before plaintiff's fall - - found no slippery substance on the stairs or dangerous condition.

Under applicable law, this Court grants the motion for summary judgment and dismisses the complaint. See, Lee v Port Chester Costco Wholesale, 82 AD3d 842 [2nd Dept. 2011]; Ramos [*2]v Castega-20 Vesey St., LLC, 25 AD3d 773 [2nd Dept. 2006] [injury from slip-and-fall on stairs]; Katz v Seminole Realty Corp., 10 AD3d 386 [2nd Dept. 2004] [no showing that deli owner was informed of a spillage].

The Court notes that the Appellate Division, First Department, in Aviles v 2333 1st Corp., 66 AD3d 432 [2009], affirmed the lower court's denial of a summary judgment motion on a slip-and-fall on a staircase. In that case, however, there was no testimony or evidence that anyone on behalf of the landlord or anyone else did a check of the premises. In this case, Rice makes clear that he personally did the "walk through" looking for any dangerous condition only 90 minutes before the plaintiff's accident, and he found none.

The defendants' motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The foregoing constitutes the decision, order, and opinion of the Court.

______________________________Hon. Charles J. Markey

Justice, Supreme Court, Queens County

Dated: Long Island City, New York

September 1, 2011