Torts · MBE-tested
Anthony McFadden, Appellant, v. 726 Liberty Corp., Respondent
89 A.D.3d 1067933 N.Y.S.2d 617·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2011·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Anthony McFadden, Appellant, v 726 Liberty Corp., Respondent.
[933 NYS2d 617]
[MAJORITY]
“ ‘[A] plaintiffs inability to identify the cause of the [subject] fall is fatal to the cause of action because a finding that the defendant’s negligence, if any, proximately caused the plaintiffs injuries would be based on speculation’ ” (Alabre v Kings Flatland Car Care Ctr., Inc., 84 AD3d 1286, 1287 [2011], quoting Rajwan v 109-23 Owners Corp., 82 AD3d 1199, 1200 [2011]; see Capasso v Capasso, 84 AD3d 997, 998 [2011]; Patrick v Costco Wholesale Corp., 77 AD3d 810 [2010]). Here, the defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff was unable to identify the cause of his fall (see Capasso v Capasso, 84 AD3d at 998; Patrick v Costco Wholesale Corp., 77 AD3d at 811). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562-564 [1980]; McCord v Olympia & York Maiden Lane Co., 8 AD3d 634, 636 [2004]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Mastro, J.E, Florio, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.