In Seleznyov v New York City Tr. Auth., the Appellate Division, First Department reversed summary judgment for, and reinstated plaintiff’s complaint against, defendants New York City Transit Authority and the City of New York.
It held:
NYCTA failed to establish entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, in this action where plaintiff was injured when she slipped and fell on debris as she descended the stairs at a subway station. NYCTA did not show the absence of actual or constructive notice of the condition that allegedly caused plaintiff to fall. Although the affidavit from NYCTA’s employee shows that the stairs were cleaned in accordance with a cleaning schedule, the employee averred that she began cleaning after the accident, and NYCTA did not submit any evidence showing when the stairway was last cleaned or inspected before the accident. Contrary to defendants’ contention that the affidavit established a reasonable cleaning schedule, the affidavit in fact raises questions as to the adequacy and reasonableness of the schedule. Moreover, plaintiff adequately identified the condition that caused her fall as a piece of newspaper with a hard object underneath it.
Since defendant NYCTA failed to satisfy its prima facie summary judgment burden, there was no need to address the sufficiency of plaintiff’s opposition papers.