The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P has cerebral palsy. P was a resident of the Aztec West Condominium. P complained to Gartenberg, the condo property manager, that the elevator door was 'closing too fast.' Gartenberg communicated this information to Bergen Hydraulic's (D). On October 14, 2010, P entered the elevator and rode it to the lobby. According to When she exited, the elevator doors closed prematurely, striking her and knocking her to the ground. She fell face forward, hitting her head on her walker. As she lay prone, the doors opened and closed on her a second time. P suffered injuries to various parts of her body and required a seventeen-day stay at a rehabilitation institute where she received extensive physical therapy and other medical treatment. The elevator doors were equipped with two safety features-a mechanical safety edge and an electric eye. A mechanical safety edge is a bumper that causes an elevator door to retract when it makes contact with an object. An electric eye emits light beams from the elevator doors across the entrance threshold, detecting the presence of objects in its pathway. If working properly, the electric eye prevents the elevator doors from closing on a person. Four days later, a construction code official for the City of Hackensack inspected the elevator and determined that the electric eye was in need of repair. Bergen Hydraulic (D) conducted an inspection, found that the elevator's electric eye's relay contacts were 'not functioning properly,' and repaired it that day. Each defendant denied knowledge of any malfunction or problems with the elevator's electric eye before the accident. P provided a report from an expert in elevator repair and maintenance, who concluded that the elevator's malfunctioning electric eye caused the accident. Ds submitted an expert report from a certified elevator inspector, which stated that P's 'failure to clear the path' of the closing elevator door 'in a timely manner' was the proximate cause of her injuries. Bergen Hydraulic's (D) expert report agreed with that assertion and stated that the elevator was 'properly maintained' at the time of the accident. Ds moved for summary judgment on the basis that they did not have notice of a malfunctioning electric eye before the accident. The trial court dismissed P's complaint. The court rejected the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, finding that the malfunctioning of elevator doors is not an occurrence that 'ordinarily bespeaks negligence.' The court stated that P 'did not refute the contention that the electric eye, being a mechanical device, is subject to failure from time to time totally unrelated to negligence.' The Appellate Division affirmed. The panel agreed with the trial court. It ultimately held that Ds' lack of 'actual or constructive notice of the electric eye malfunction . . . [was] fatal to P's claims of premises liability.' P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.