| Vilomar v 490 E. 181st St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp Corp. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 03388 [50 AD3d 469] |
| April 17, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Roberto Vilomar, Appellant, v 490 East 181st StreetHousing Development Fund Corp Corporation et al., Respondents. |
—[*1] Brody, Benard & Branch, LLP, New York (Tanya M. Branch of counsel), forrespondents.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mark Friedlander, J.), entered December 18, 2006,which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff slipped on a banana peel on aninterior stairwell in his apartment building, granted the motion of defendants property owner andmanagement company for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed,without costs.
Defendants made a prima facie showing that they did not have constructive notice of thebanana peel on which plaintiff allegedly slipped (see Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp.,84 NY2d 967 [1994]) by submitting plaintiff's deposition testimony that he did not see anybanana peels on the stairs the day before the accident, and the deposition testimony of thebuilding's superintendent that he cleaned the stairs twice a day, on arriving for work between6:00 and 6:45 a.m. and after 4:00 p.m. before leaving work, that there was no garbage on thestairs when he left the building the evening before the accident, and that the accident happenedshortly before he arrived for work (see Strowman v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 252 AD2d384, 384-385 [1998]). In opposition, plaintiff offered the affidavit of his live-in companion thatthe building had not been cleaned for at least four days before the accident, that she had seen thebanana peel on which plaintiff said he slipped on the stairs for at least two days before theaccident, that there was a lot of other garbage on the stairs for several consecutive days before theaccident, and that she complained to both the superintendent and the management office aboutthe garbage that was always on the stairs and in the hallways and lobby but that nothing was everdone. This affidavit was properly rejected by the motion court as feigned evidence tailored toavoid the consequences of plaintiff's deposition testimony that he did not observe any bananapeels on the stairs the day before the accident and never made any complaints to defendantsspecifically about garbage on [*2]the stairs (see Phillips vBronx Lebanon Hosp., 268 AD2d 318 [2000]; Schiavone v Brinewood Rod & GunClub, 283 AD2d 234, 235-236 [2001]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Buckley,Catterson and Acosta, JJ.