Williams v. ATA Housing Corp.Williams v. ATA Housing Corp.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs, the motions are granted, and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
The plaintiff alleged that he sustained injuries when he fell
Each defendant met its prima facie burden on its respective motion for summary judgment by presenting evidence in the form of the deposition testimony of the plaintiff and the building superintendent demonstrating that the defendants were not aware of any slippery condition on the stairway (see Concetto v Pedalino, 308 AD2d 470 [2003]).
In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The only proof that the plaintiff submitted in opposition to the motions, an affidavit of a purported notice witness, was improperly considered by the Supreme Court in light of the plaintiff’s failure to properly disclose that witness in his discovery responses (see Concetto v Pedalino, supra). Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Krausman and Fisher, JJ., concur.