Lee-David Weiner Obtains Summary Judgment on Behalf of a Snow Removal Contractor

In Couverthier v. Prestige Properties et al., Bronx County Index No: 300478/14 the plaintiff slipped and fell due to insufficient lighting and ice in a shopping center parking lot. Our client last removed snow and ice from the premises one week prior to plaintiff’s accident. Pursuant to the snow removal contract the contractor had no duty to return to the property or to further inspect the parking lot after their work was completed and approved by the management company.

The Court held that our client owed no duty of care to the plaintiff and found that none of the Espinal exceptions applied. The Court noted that the mere supposition that the snow removal contractor’s snow clearing activities one week before plaintiff’s accident must have left behind the patches of ice that plaintiff claims to have observed is insufficient to establish the exception to Espinal’s general rule that applies where the defendant “launched a for or instrument of harm.” The case settled for more than 2 million dollars with no contribution from our client.