Davis v Brookfield Props. Mgt., LLC, 2023 NY Slip Op 05310 [220 AD3d 527]

October 19, 2023

Appellate Division, First Department

[*1]

Theodore Davis, Respondent,

v

Brookfield Properties Management, LLC, et al., Appellants.

Goetz Schenker Blee & Wiederhorn, LLP, New York (Lisa De Lindsay of counsel), for appellants.

Mitchell Dranow, Sea Cliff, for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank P. Nervo, J.), entered on or about May 17, 2022, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court correctly determined that defendants did not demonstrate, as a matter of law, that they did not create and/or did not have actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition, an unsupported ceiling tile that fell onto plaintiff. ( see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History , 67 NY2d 836, 837-838 [1986]). Even assuming, as defendants argue, that they met their prima facie burden of showing lack of notice through the affidavits of their employees, plaintiff submitted ample evidence presenting issues of fact on these issues to warrant denial of summary judgment.

We have considered the remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Kern, Scarpulla, Mendez, O’Neill Levy, JJ..