| Goldfischer v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., Inc. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 05192 [63 AD3d 575] |
| June 23, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Barbara Goldfischer et al., Appellants, v The GreatAtlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc., et al., Respondents. |
—[*1] Boeggeman, George & Corde, P.C., White Plains (Cynthia Dolan of counsel), forrespondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered November 17,2008, which, in a personal injury action for plaintiff's trip and fall in a supermarket owned andmanaged by defendants, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing thecomplaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
In opposition to defendants' prima facie showing that plaintiff failed to identify the cause ofher fall, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Unaware of what caused her fall, shemerely surmised that it was caused by the bump in the rubber floor mat that she observed for thefirst time after she fell. Coplaintiff husband testified that he did not observe what seemed to be acrease in the mat until after his wife fell, and could not identify where the crease was on the mator whether it was higher than one inch or "accurately describe it that specifically." The failure toidentify the condition that caused plaintiff's fall is fatal to plaintiffs' claim (see Kwitny vWestchester Towers Owners Corp., 47 AD3d 495, 495-496 [2008]; Pena v Women'sOutreach Network, Inc., 35 AD3d 104, 109-111 [2006]). Concur—Tom, J.P.,Friedman, Catterson, Moskowitz and Richter, JJ.