| Posada v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 01630 [70 AD3d 1019] |
| February 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Rosa Posada, Appellant, v Great Atlantic and Pacific TeaCompany, Doing Business as Waldbaum's Supermarket,Respondent. |
—[*1] Sobel, Kelly & Schleier, LLC, Huntington, N.Y. (Maria Zouros of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by herbrief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), renderedMay 29, 2008, as denied that branch of her motion which was for summary judgment on theissue of liability.
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and thatbranch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability isgranted.
The plaintiff alleged that while she was shopping in the dairy section of the defendantsupermarket, she reached for an item in an open refrigeration unit, and was struck from the rearby a "large multi-wheeled cart." The cart, which contained products to put on the shelves of thesupermarket, was being used by one of the defendant's employees. The plaintiff commenced thisaction and subsequently moved, inter alia, for summary judgment on the issue of liability, whichwas denied by the Supreme Court.
In response to the plaintiff's establishment, prima facie, of her entitlement to judgment as amatter of law, the defendant failed to submit evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact(see Araujo v Elkahlaoui, 68 AD3d 1030 [2009]). Therefore, the Supreme Court shouldhave granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the issueof liability. Fisher, J.P., Florio, Belen and Hall, JJ., concur.