Walton v. Wegman's Food Markets

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Walton v. Wegman's Food Markets

191 A.D.2d 1040, 595 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3005

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 12, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 191 A.D.2d 1040 (Walton v. Wegman's Food Markets) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walton v. Wegman's Food Markets, 191 A.D.2d 1040, 595 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3005 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court should have granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant satisfied its initial burden of establishing that it lacked actual or constructive notice of the accumulation of water on the floor of its store. Plaintiffs failed to submit material in evidentiary form sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact concerning actual or constructive notice, and summary dismissal was warranted (see, Anderson v Klein’s Foods, 139 AD2d 904, affd 73 NY2d 835; Eddy v Tops Friendly Mkts., 91 AD2d 1203, affd 59 NY2d 692). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Willis, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Fallon and Boehm, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court should have granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant satisfied its initial burden of establishing that it lacked actual or constructive notice of the accumulation of water on the floor of its store. Plaintiffs failed to submit material in evidentiary form sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact concerning actual or constructive notice, and summary dismissal was warranted (see, Anderson v Klein’s Foods, 139 AD2d 904, affd 73 NY2d 835; Eddy v Tops Friendly Mkts., 91 AD2d 1203, affd 59 NY2d 692). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Willis, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Fallon and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 1040, 595 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walton-v-wegmans-food-markets-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack