| Scott v Rochdale Vil., Inc. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 06243 [65 AD3d 621] |
| August 18, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Rose Scott, Appellant, v Rochdale Village, Inc.,Respondent. |
—[*1] Baker Greenspan & Bernstein, Bellmore, N.Y. (Robin R. Halstrom of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Queens County (Agate, J.), entered April 17, 2008, which granted thedefendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff allegedly sustained various personal injuries when she slipped and fell on aninterior stairway in the building within the defendant's apartment complex where she resided. Onits motion for summary judgment, the defendant met its burden of establishing its prima facieentitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320,324 [1986]), by demonstrating that the plaintiff was unable to identify the cause of her accidentwithout engaging in speculation (seeCostantino v Webel, 57 AD3d 472; Slattery v O'Shea, 46 AD3d 669, 670 [2007]; Manning v 6638 18th Ave. RealtyCorp., 28 AD3d 434, 435 [2006]). In response, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issueof fact as to the cause of the accident (see Manning v 6638 18th Ave. Realty Corp., 28AD3d at 435). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion forsummary judgment. Spolzino, J.P., Angiolillo, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.