Bautista v Supervalu, Inc.

Holding The court affirmed the dismissal of the personal injury action, finding that the defendants established the hazardous condition was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous. The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact, as their expert’s opposition was deemed speculative and conclusory.

The court’s words

there is no duty to protect or warn against conditions that are not inherently dangerous and that are readily observable by the reasonable use of one's senses

2026 NY Slip Op 05266, at the official text

A condition is open and obvious if it is readily observable by those employing the reasonable use of their senses, given the conditions at the time of the accident

2026 NY Slip Op 05266, at the official text

The determination of whether an asserted hazard is open and obvious cannot be divorced from the surrounding circumstances, and whether a condition is not inherently dangerous

2026 NY Slip Op 05266, at the official text

The evidence submitted by the defendants in support of their motion, including, inter alia, video surveillance footage established, among other things, that the plaintiff Yanet R. Bautista was familiar with the area

2026 NY Slip Op 05266, at the official text

In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The affirmation of the plaintiffs' expert was speculative, conclusory, and not supported by the record

2026 NY Slip Op 05266, at the official text