SKETCHES OF COURT: Verdict favors MTA in slip-and-fall case

November 16, 2015 By Alba Acevedo Special to the Brooklyn Daily Eagle

Court sketch by Alba Acevedo

Share this:

In this courtroom sketch, Hon. Wayne Saitta listens as the plaintiff’s attorney Kelby Bowman (standing), of the law firm Talisman, DeLorenz & Pinnisi, delivers his summation to the jury in the bifurcated trial Curtis v. NYC Transit Authority. At issue is the determination of liability.

On Jan. 2, 2011, Curtis Edwards was climbing steps at the elevated subway station at Sutter Avenue, and fell. There had been a blizzard a week earlier, 5 inches of snowfall since, and rain that day. Edwards alleges that the stairwell was very slippery from weather conditions which left snow, ice and slush on the steps, and further claims that he was injured in a fall due to negligence on the part of the Transit Authority to maintain the stairwell in safe condition.

The Transit Authority, represented by David Olarsch (center), outside counsel and Elias Falcon (at right) of the law offices of Lawrence Heisler, made note that the plaintiff fell a second time while respondents were at the scene, and argued that the plaintiff’s footwear, specifically “duck boots,” were not up to task. They produced a pair of boots to display to the jury, but the plaintiff had denied that contention.

The jury believed that there was snow, ice and slush on the stairs, but when deliberating on the question of whether such had created an unreasonably safe condition, they returned a verdict for the defendant, finding no negligence on the part of the Transit Authority in the trial that concluded last week in Kings County Civil Term.