Salgado v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on April 2, 2013 Mazzarelli, J.P., Moskowitz, DeGrasse, Feinman, Clark, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered September 7, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from, denied the motion of defendant American Airlines for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
American failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action where plaintiff alleges that she slipped and fell on a wet floor. American did not affirmatively demonstrate that its agent was not responsible for creating the defective condition that caused plaintiff's fall. Rather, American attempted to establish the absence of negligence by merely pointing to gaps in plaintiff's account of the accident (see Dabbagh v Newmark Knight Frank Global Mgt. Servs., LLC, 99 AD3d 448, 450 [1st Dept 2012]). Although American's facilities manager did testify that the cleaning company usually mopped the terminal floor during the night when passenger traffic was lighter, he also noted that the company performed spot cleaning when notified of a need.
We have considered American's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw ...