Murphy v City Mini Stor. LLC

Holding The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint, holding that the defendant met its prima facie burden under the storm in progress doctrine by establishing that a storm was ongoing at the time of the accident. The majority determined that light snowfall and the presence of footprints were sufficient to show the storm was in progress, despite the dissent’s argument that the accumulation was merely negligible.

The court’s words

A landowner is not responsible for a failure to remove snow and ice until a reasonable time has elapsed after cessation of [a] storm

2026 NY Slip Op 04622, at the official text

evidence that it was not precipitating or only lightly precipitating at the time of an accident does not render the storm in progress doctrine inapplicable

2026 NY Slip Op 04622, at the official text

the video shows that it was lightly snowing at that time, a point conceded by the dissent, and that plaintiff left the only visible footprints

2026 NY Slip Op 04622, at the official text

plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact whether there was a storm in progress when the accident occurred

2026 NY Slip Op 04622, at the official text