DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Denise F. Molia, J.), dated November 18, 2020. The order granted the defendants motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell on a plastic container of mums on the exterior grounds of the defendants supermarket in Riverhead. The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant to recover damages for the personal injuries she allegedly sustained, surmising that wind must have blown the potted flowers from its display location and into her path. The defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, contending that it did not create the alleged hazardous condition or have actual or constructive notice of its existence. In the order appealed from, dated November 18, 2020, the Supreme Court granted the motion. The plaintiff appeals.
In a trip-and-fall case, “a defendant property owner moving for summary judgment has the burden of making a prima facie showing that it neither (1) affirmatively created the hazardous condition nor (2) had actual or constructive notice of the condition and a reasonable time to correct or warn about its existence” (Parietti v. Wal–Mart Stores, Inc., 29 N.Y.3d 1136, 1137, 61 N.Y.S.3d 523, 83 N.E.3d 853). Here, the defendant established, prima facie, that it did not create the alleged hazardous condition or have actual or constructive notice of its existence (see Hagan v. City of New York, 166 A.D.3d 590, 591, 87 N.Y.S.3d 325; Guzman v. Jewish Bd. of Family & Childrens Servs., Inc., 103 A.D.3d 776, 777, 960 N.Y.S.2d 151). In support of their motion, the defendants submitted, inter alia, transcripts of the plaintiffs deposition testimony, in which she testified that when she traversed the accident site approximately 15 minutes prior to the incident, she did not see the condition that subsequently caused her to trip and fall. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
CONNOLLY, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, FORD and DOWLING, JJ., concur.