| Lopez v Retail Prop. Trust |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 03984 [118 AD3d 676] |
| June 4, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| Welquis Lopez, Appellant, v Retail PropertyTrust et al., Respondents. |
Edelstein & Grossman, New York, N.Y. (Jonathan I. Edelstein of counsel), forappellant.
Ansa Assuncao LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Thomas O. O'Connor ofcounsel), for respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from anorder of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), entered May 16, 2012, whichgranted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter oflaw dismissing the complaint. The defendants showed that the subject escalator wasfunctioning properly before and after the accident and that they did not have notice ofany defect (see Lasser vNorthrop Grumman Corp., 55 AD3d 561 [2008]; Hardy v Lojan RealtyCorp., 303 AD2d 457 [2003]).
In opposition, the plaintiff submitted an expert's affidavit. As the expert's affidavit isspeculative and conclusory, and assumes facts not supported by the evidence, it does notraise a triable issue of fact (seeShapiro v Gurwin Jewish Geriatric Nursing & Rehabilitation Ctr., 84 AD3d1348 [2011]; Ioffe vHampshire House Apt. Corp., 21 AD3d 930 [2005]; Gralnik v Brighton BeachAssoc., 3 AD3d 518 [2004]; Scola v Sun Intl. N. Am., 279 AD2d 466[2001]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion forsummary judgment dismissing the complaint.
The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached inlight of our determination. Mastro, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and Austin, JJ.,concur. [Prior Case History: 35 Misc 3d 1234(A), 2012 NY Slip Op50996(U).]