Plaintiff’s post-accident observations of defective carpet were insufficient to create an issue of fact.

The plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell over a carpet at the entrance door to the defendant’s property. The appellate division granted summary judgment to the property owner, finding that the defendant established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment based on the doorman’s testimony that the carpet was fine when he saw it an hour before the accident. The plaintiff could not create an issue of fact because he did not feel any defect before or during the accident. His post-accident observations of the carpet (photographs taken a few days later) could not be used to create an issue of fact because they were not probative of the condition of the carpet at the time of the accident.

_{Case Law Alerts, 2^nd Quarter, April 2017}

_{Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2017 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}