Chemont v. Pathmark Supermarkets, Inc.Chemont v. Pathmark Supermarkets, Inc.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated March 22, 2000, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The plaintiff was allegedly injured when she slipped and fell on a puddle of rain water on the floor of the vestibule of the
The defendant met its initial burden of showing, as a matter of law, that it did not create the dangerous condition which caused the accident, and did not have actual notice thereof (see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,
Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to proffer any evidence that this was a recurrent dangerous condition, or that the defendant had actual knowledge of this allegedly recurrent dangerous condition (see, Carlos v New Rochelle Mun. Hous. Auth.,