Sprague v. Profoods Restaurant Supply, LLCSprague v. Profoods Restaurant Supply, LLC
While the evidence submitted by defendants in this slip-and-fall case was sufficient to establish that they neither created the alleged icy hazard nor had actual knowledge of it, the evidence was insufficient to establish as a matter of law that they lacked constructive notice of it (see Lebron v Napa Realty Corp., 65 AD3d 436 [2009]; Moser v BP/CG Ctr. I, LLC, 56 AD3d 323 [2008]; Baptiste v 1626 Meat Corp., 45 AD3d 259 [2007]). The motion court properly found that defendants’ submissions, including plaintiff‘s deposition and defendants’ employee’s deposition, as well as certified copies of meteorological data, created triable issues of fact as to the size of the ice patch, its visibility,
We have considered defendants’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.