In White v. New York City Housing Authority , Scharmel White sued after slipping and falling on a wet substance on her building's interior stairwell.
When the New York County Supreme Court dismissed her case, White appealed to the Appellate Division, First Department.
The AD1 thought White failed to offer evidence of a specific, recurring dangerous condition. (A mere "general awareness" didn't suffice.) It further noted that on the day of the incident, the janitor adhered to his routine -- which included sweeping down the staircases in the morning, removing all debris, and reporting any unusual conditions.
A supervisor also testified he examined the logbooks for the three-month period preceding the incident and could find no report made by his staff or the building's tenants of any wet stairwells.
Was is that black and white?
(Please don't get all schmarmy on us.)
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: White v. New York City Housing Authority