Lack of Evidence in Slip and Fall Case Results in Award Reduction
Ms. Shaline Persuad slipped and fell in the mezzanine area of a metro station, following a snowstorm, in Brooklyn on January 28, 2015. The floor was wet due to the accumulation of melted snow that commuters had tracked in, and there were insufficient warning signs or cleanup measures. Ms. Persaud sustained substantial injuries as a consequence of the fall. Her injuries included a fractured ankle that had resulted in a prolonged recovery and difficulty walking, a wrist fracture from her attempt to defend the fall, and a lower back injury caused by the sudden impact. Her lower back injury had resulted in chronic pain and limited mobility. Ms. Persaud continued to experience ongoing emotional distress and pain as a result of widespread bruising and soft tissue damage. She also had concussions that impaired her cognitive function. Ms. Persaud filed this legal action against the New York City Transit Authority (“NYCTA”).
The Lawsuit
Ms. Persaud’s counsel did not present any witnesses employed by the NYCTA during the jury trial and read excerpts from the depositions of the janitor and a token booth agent. The Janitor reported to work at 7:00 A.M. following Ms. Persaud’s accident and the token booth agent reported to work at 6:00 A.M. that morning. Both depositions confirmed that Ms. Persaud slipped on melted snow. Ms. Persaud testified that the snow had stopped falling at approximately midnight, and that she collapsed at 6:00 A.M. during the morning rush hour, when the streets and sidewalks were wet from the snow. A video and photographs were admitted into evidence to demonstrate the damp, slushy, and muddy condition of the floor after the accident. The NYCTA presented a cleaner who stated that she cleaned the mezzanine floor between 2:05 and 3:00 A.M. on January 28, 2015 and that the floor was dry when she departed the station at 3:00 A.M. After the trial on September 10, 2020, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Ms. Persaud on the issue of liability and later awarded her $700,000 for past pain and suffering, and $1,100,000 for future pain and suffering.
In Persaud vs. NYCTA, the NYCTA moved pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) before the Civil Court to set aside the verdict on the issue of liability and to set aside the damages for being excessive. Under CPLR 4404 (a) after a jury trial, the Court can overturn a verdict or judgment if one party is entitled to win or if the verdict goes against the weight of the evidence. Based on the review of similar cases, the Court held that a defendant may be accountable for injuries resulting from a hazardous condition if they either created the hazard or were aware of it and had the opportunity to rectify it. The mere knowledge that commuters may get stuck in water or snow during bad weather is insufficient to establish that defendants had been aware of the specific hazard that resulted in the accident. The Court held that Ms. Persaud must show that the hazard was obvious and that it had been there long enough for the NYCTA’s employees to notice and fix it. However, she failed to present any evidence at trial as to how long the floor was in a dangerous condition prior to the time she fell, and failed to establish a prima facie case that the NYCTA had a sufficient length of time prior to her accident to remedy the condition of the floor. The images and the video produced by Ms. Persaud were from after her accident and the cleaner testified that the floor was cleaned at 3:00 AM. There was no proof of how long the snow was present and if NYCTA had the knowledge or sufficient time to remedy the condition of the floor. However, the Court still found NYCTA to be negligent for not placing any warning signs or performing any cleanup measures. Based on this, the Civil Court approved NYCTA’s CPLR 4404 (a) with effect to the damages being excessive and reduced the past pain and suffering damages to $400,000, and the future pain and suffering damages to $300,000. On November 19, 2021, the Civil Court entered a judgment awarding Ms. Persaud the principal sum of $700,000.
The Appeal
In cases involving substantial reduction in awards, it is common for one or more parties to file an appeal, seeking to challenge or modify the outcome. However, in this particular case, it remains unclear whether an appeal has been filed.
Sternberg Injury Law Firm
If you or a loved one has been injured in a slip and fall accident, The Sternberg Injury Law Firm is here to help. We offer complimentary consultations to evaluate your case and provide legal guidance. With a strong commitment to securing the highest compensation possible, our attorneys are well-versed in personal injury law and dedicated to fighting for your rights. When you choose to work with us, our experienced attorneys will thoroughly assess your case, discuss your options, and explain how we can best support you. We handle cases across Brooklyn, including areas such as Bedford Stuyvesant, Vinegar hill, and Prospect Heights. Contact us today via email, text, or our online contact form, and take the first step towards getting the justice you deserve.