| Kostic v Ascent Media Group, LLC |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 09225 [79 AD3d 818] |
| December 14, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Kevin Kostic, Appellant, v Ascent Media Group, LLC,Respondent, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.) |
—[*1] Lori D. Fishman, Tarrytown, N.Y., for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief,from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Berliner, J.), dated September 29,2009, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Ascent Media Group, LLC, which was forsummary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The defendant Ascent Media Group, LLC (hereinafter the defendant), established its prima facieentitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence demonstrating that it did not create orhave actual or constructive notice of the icy condition in its parking lot which allegedly caused theplaintiff to fall (see Crosthwaite v AcadiaRealty Trust, 62 AD3d 823, 824 [2009]; Wylie v Brooks/Eckerd Pharmacy, 49 AD3d 533, 534 [2008];Murphy v 136 N. Blvd. Assoc., 304 AD2d 540 [2003]). General awareness that, at times, anicy condition developed in the parking lot during winter months was insufficient to constitute notice ofthe specific condition that allegedly caused the plaintiff to fall (see Mauge v Barrow St. Ale House, 70 AD3d 1016, 1017 [2010]). Inopposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68NY2d 320 [1986]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant's motion which wasfor summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Rivera, J.P., Dillon,Angiolillo and Austin, JJ., concur.