On a cold evening in February 2000, Dominic DeStefano slipped and fell on a patch of ice on a sidewalk along 27th Avenue in Brooklyn, and later brought an action against the City of New York for personal injuries sustained in the fall.
After the City demonstrated that a storm was still in progress when the accident occurred, the Kings County Supreme Court dismissed the complaint.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, noted that the City's responsibility for correcting icy conditions is not triggered until a storm has completely subsided. In fact, according to the AD2, even a "lull" in the weather did not give rise to a duty on the part of the City to remove any accumulations.
While DeStefano claimed he slipped on pre-existing snow and ice rather than on a fresh accumulation, the AD2 rejected that argument as "pure speculation."
Finally, the AD2 held that because the City did not have actual or constructive notice of the purported icy patch on the sidewalk, dismissal of the complaint was proper.
We challenge you to find something slippery about this analysis.
For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: DeStefano v. City of New York