In a recent decision, the New York Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed summary judgment for our client, a major casino operator in Queens. Plaintiff alleged that she tripped and fell on an exterior walkway at the casino property. However, she was unable to identify what caused her fall, testifying at deposition that she did not know if she slipped or tripped, or what made her fall.
We moved for summary judgment, arguing that Plaintiff’s inability to identify the cause of her fall was fatal to her claim. The Supreme Court agreed and granted our motion. Plaintiff appealed.
In a unanimous opinion, the Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the casino operator established its entitlement to summary judgment by demonstrating that Plaintiff could not identify the cause of her fall without speculating. The Court rejected Plaintiff’s arguments that alleged inadequate lighting or building code violations raised factual issues, as she never claimed those conditions proximately caused her accident.
This decision reaffirms the well-settled principle that a plaintiff who cannot identify what caused her fall cannot maintain a claim against the property owner. The matter was handled by William Clair and Michael Dono.