Leav & Steinberg LLP recently represented a man who was injured in a slip and fall accident on an icy and snowy parking lot. The defendant, a snow removal company, tried to file a motion for summary judgment in their favor, rather than going to trial or settling out of court. Associate Julia Slater successfully defeated the defendant’s motion.
After his shift at work, our client (the “plaintiff”) was walking through his employer’s parking lot toward his car, when he slipped and fell on black ice and snow that was not properly cleared from a snowstorm the night before. The plaintiff fell and broke his right ankle. We filed a lawsuit against the snow removal company responsible for clearing the employer’s parking lot. The snow removal company filed a motion against the plaintiff, asking the judge to rule in its favor and that the case should be decided, based on summary judgment, right then and there, arguing that the company was not liable for our client’s injuries.
Our Opposition to the Motion
We vigorously opposed the snow removal company’s summary judgment motion. We fought back and argued that under New York law, the snow removal company was liable for our client’s injuries. Additionally, we retained a weather expert who proved that the weather conditions during the days leading up to our client’s fall clearly created the conditions that caused our client to slip and fall in the parking lot. We also interviewed a non-party witness who affirmed the fact that the parking lot in question was covered in snow and ice for the days leading up to our client’s fall, and that no one cleared the parking lot for days.
The Dismissal of the Motion
The Honorable Justice of the Bronx County Supreme Court of New York ruled in our favor, exclaiming that based on our arguments, the snow removal company was, in fact, responsible for our client’s injuries resulting from his fall. A portion of the decision is as follows: “[The snow removal company] has failed to eliminate all triable issues of fact as to whether [it] launched a force or instrument of harm. Notably, [the witness on behalf of the snow removal company] testified only as to the customary practices of his company in the event of snowfall or ice. Indeed, [he] testified that he had no recollection of what, if any, snow and/or ice removal services were performed in the month of February of 2014. Nor did he have any records of [the] same. In the absence of any evidence as to what snow removal efforts, if any, were performed by [the snow removal company] in the days leading up to the date of the accident, [it] has failed to meet its burden on the motion.”
Even when our cases are challenged on the merits, Leav & Steinberg LLP can successfully argue our client’s side of the story to win the key issues. The motion was successfully opposed by associate Julia Slater with the assistance of partners Edward A. Steinberg and Daniela F. Henriques. If you’ve been injured in New York, you need an experienced team of personal injury attorneys that can represent your interests and argue the facts of the case to help oppose motions for dismissal or summary judgment. Contact the lawyers at Leav & Steinberg to schedule a free consultation.