BAD CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA RECORDS KILLED THEM
After SA slipped on fell on some ice and filed a personal injury case, the defendants claimed that they were protected by the “storm in progress” rule, which exempts a party from liability while inclement weather -- such as the accumulation of snow and ice -- is underway. When the Kings County Supreme Court concurred, and dismissed the case, an appeal ensued.
Interestingly, on its review, the Appellate Division, Second Department, noted that there were deficiencies in the record which warranted reversal.
Among other things, the defendants’ climatological records weren’t certified, and they failed to unequivocally establish that there was a “storm in progress” at the time of SA’s fall.
Given those evidentiary gaps, the AD2 reversed the underlying determination and reinstated the claims.
They clearly couldn’t weather that storm.
# # #
DECISION