Mandel v. 340 Owners Corp.
Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Bloom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf appeared as counsel of record in this matter.
What this case was about
A woman sued her building's owner and managers after she tripped and fell over a hump or fold in an inclement-weather floor runner in the lobby. The trial court threw out her case on summary judgment, but the question on appeal was whether the defendants had proven they were entitled to dismissal and whether the plaintiff had adequately shown what caused her fall. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed and reinstated her complaint, finding the defendants never offered evidence of their inspection routine and that the plaintiff's description of feeling her foot slide under a hump in the runner was enough to identify the cause of the fall and raise issues for trial.
Gair’s role
The firm represented the plaintiff, Laura Mandel, as appellant, appealing the dismissal of her trip-and-fall personal-injury complaint on summary judgment.
Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Blom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf, New York (Christopher J. Donadio of counsel), for appellant.
Attorneys on this matter
Full opinion
Reproduced from the public court record.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (W. Franc Perry, J.), entered October 21, 2019, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered on or about May 26, 2020, which denied plaintiff's motion for reargument, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper.
Defendants' failure to establish prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law requires the denial of the motion regardless of the strength of plaintiff's opposition (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). They failed to offer evidence of their inspection routines, including evidence regarding the last time the accident site was inspected (see Caban v Bronx Park S. II Assoc., 142 AD3d 462 [1st Dept 2016]).
In any event, plaintiff raises factual issues. Although plaintiff did not actually observe what caused her to trip and fall over an inclement weather runner in the lobby of defendants' building, her evidence, together with reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, including that she felt the toebox of her right foot slide under what felt to be a hump in the runner, causing her foot to get caught, and her to lose her balance and fall, sufficiently identified the cause of her fall (see Schneider v Kings Hwy. Hosp. Ctr., 67 NY2d 743 [1986]; cf. Reeves v 1700 First Ave. LLC, 142 AD3d 830 [1st Dept 2016]). Concur—Acosta, P.J., Gische, Oing, González, Kennedy, JJ.