Opinion
No. 83 SSM 3.
Decided March 29, 2007.
APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered October 26, 2006. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, (1) reversed, on the law, an order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Paul G. Feinman, J.), which, to the extent appealed from, had denied defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and for a conditional order of indemnification as against third-party defendant, (2) granted the motion, and (3) dismissed the complaint.
Lennard v Mendik Realty Corp., 33 AD3d 527, reversed.
Sullivan Papain Block McGrath Cannavo P.C., New York City ( Brian J. Shoot of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of Charles J. Siegel, New York City ( Jack L. Cohen of counsel), for respondents and third-party plaintiffs.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City ( Kristin M. Helmers of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.
Before: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO, READ, SMITH, PIGOTT and JONES concur in memorandum.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the case remitted to that Court for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal to that Court.
Plaintiff contends that she was injured when she slipped and fell on loose floor tiles in a bathroom at her workplace. Defendants, owners and managers of the premises, failed to establish that they lacked constructive notice of the allegedly defective floor tiles as a matter of law ( see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837; see also Chapman v Silber, 97 NY2d 9, 19). Accordingly, summary judgment was not appropriate.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, etc.