Majority
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered January 24, 2014, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
Even assuming that defendant met its prima facie burden, the record presents triable issues as to whether defendant created the wet stair condition (see e.g. Velez v New York City Hous. Auth., 91 AD3d 422 [1st Dept 2012]). Plaintiff testified that she observed water on the stairs, that the water had dampened her back and pants in the process of her fall and that the staircase smelled like it had recently been cleaned. Moreover, a janitorial schedule for the building indicated that the subject staircase was to be mopped shortly before plaintiffs fall and the caretaker testified that he would have mopped the staircase around the time of the accident.
Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Renwick and Gische, JJ.
Cases cited
- Kistoo v. City of New York 195 AD2d 403 at 404 p. 620
- Velez v. New York City Housing Authority 91 AD3d 422 p. 620