Sullo v. Greenberg
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed this negligence action against Defendant, a medical doctor, seeking damages for injuries she sustained after she fell on an entrance ramp to Defendant's podiatric officers during a winter storm. The superior court granted summary judgment for Defendant, concluding (1) there was no dispute that the storm on the day of Plaintiff's fall included snow; (2) Defendant was justified to wait until the storm ended before taking action to treat his office entrance; and (3) Defendant did not owe Plaintiff or other invitees a heightened duty of care. The Supreme Court vacated the lower court's judgment and remanded, holding (1) because the parties disagreed as to the extent of the storm on the day of Plaintiff's fall, additional factual findings were required to determine whether Defendant was under a duty to treat his entranceway before the storm had ended, and thus, the grant of summary judgment was improper; and (2) Defendant did not owe Plaintiff a heightened duty of care.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.