| MUST READS (1 summaries) | |||
| NOTEWORTHY | IF YOU MUST READ | ||
 Defendants granted summary judgment for slip and fall that took place between established reasonable cleaning schedule times where plaintiff did not show that schedule was “manifestly unreasonable.” Plaintiff’s testimony that he did not notice anything on stairs when he initially left building, observed wet condition when he returned but did not notify anyone, and slipped when he again left building failed to raise issue on notice of condition for sufficient time to correct it. Thomas v Sere Hous. Dev. Fund Corp.Comment: The “established reasonable cleaning schedule” requiring proof that it was “manifestly unreasonable” to raise a question of fact adds a significant dimension to raising or eliminating issues of notice in slip and fall cases and should be considered by both sides in all motions and appeals for summary judgment. |
| NOTEWORTHY (1 summaries) | |||
| MUST READS | IF YOU MUST READ | ||
| Defendants denied summary judgment on conflicting accounts of whether defendants received notice of fast closing elevator door and conflicting expert opinions, as well as questions of fact on purpose of elevator shoe installed by elevator company. Res ipsa loquitor claim raised for first time on appeal not considered. Mable v 384 E. Assoc., LLC |
| IF YOU MUST READ (1 summaries) | |||
| MUST READS | NOTEWORTHY | ||
| Motion to vacate master arbitrator’s award granted as arbitrator irrationally ignored controlling law that no-fault policy was void ab initio where injured party who assigned claim to provider failed to appear at medical exams. Matter of Global Liberty Ins. Co. of N.Y. v Top Q. Inc. |