TRIP-AND-FALL ACCIDENT CASE DISMISSED ON DEFENSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION FOR "TRIVIAL DEFECT"

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York

Case: Schwartz v. Bleu Evolution Bar & Restaurant Corp.

Date: Dec. 13, 2011

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Queens; Queens injury lawyer)

Comment: A short decision. And accident victim's sidewalk trip-and-fall case is dismissed on defense summary judgment motion due to a so-called "trivial defect."

**************************************************

RELATED POSTS:

MARBLE CHIP IN STEP "NOSING" IS "TRIVIAL DEFECT" AND DEFEATS STAIRWAY TRIP-AND-FALL CASE; SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO DEFENSE (Posted by Queens injury lawyer Gary E. Rosenberg on Nov 26, 2011)

TRIP AND FALL ACCIDENT CASE DISMISSAL AFFIRMED ON APPEAL ON OTHER GROUNDS; DUTY WAS, YES, OWED TO PEDESTRIAN BY PARKING LOT OWNER, BUT PLAINTIFF TRIPPED ON "TRIVIAL DEFECT" (Posted by Brooklyn injury lawyer Gary E. Rosenberg on Dec 3, 2011)

**************************************************

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered April 13, 2011, which denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint.

**************************************************

RELATED POSTS:

RAISED MANHOLE COVER IN PARKING LOT A "TRIVIAL DEFECT"; DEFENSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION GRANTED & CASE DISMISSED (Posted by Brooklyn injury lawyer Gary E. Rosenberg on Dec 13, 2011)

SLIGHTLY RAISED WOODEN FLOOR PLANK IS "TRIVIAL DEFECT"; DEFENSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED IN TRIP-AND-FALL ACCIDENT

(Posted by Brooklyn injury lawyer Gary E. Rosenberg on Jan 11, 2012)

SHE DIES IN TRIP-AND-FALL ACCIDENT ON SIDEWALK; CASE DISMISSED BECAUSE OF "TRIVIAL DEFECT" (Posted by Brooklyn injury lawyer Gary E. Rosenberg on Nov 13, 2011)

**************************************************

Plaintiff tripped and fell when her foot got caught in a gap between two sidewalk flags. The gap was approximately one‑half‑inch‑wide and the height differential between the flags was also approximately one‑half‑inch. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment based on plaintiff's theory of how the accident occurred. The gap between the flags and the height differential was trivial and plaintiff has not come forward with evidence to show that the defect presented a significant hazard despite being de minimis (see Gaud v. Markham, 307 A.D.2d 845, 764 N.Y.S.2d 241 [2003] citing Trincere v. County of Suffolk, 90 N.Y.2d 976, 977_978, 665 N.Y.S.2d 615, 688 N.E.2d 489 [1997]).

Categories