Andy C. Jairam

A snow removal contractor brought a motion for summary judgment dismissing a personal injury slip-and-fall claim and related cross-claims.

The plaintiff filed no responding evidence and did not appear on the motion.

The court held that the absence of any admissible evidence regarding the fall, injuries, or sidewalk condition meant there was no genuine issue requiring a trial as against the contractor, and the claim against it was dismissed.

However, the municipality’s cross-claim for contribution and indemnity raised unresolved factual issues, including the interpretation of meteorological evidence and whether contractual snow-removal obligations were met.

Those issues required expert evidence and were determined to be genuine issues for trial.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of a negligence action regarding the sale of a vehicle that had previously been in an accident.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no reversible error by the trial judge.

The court noted there was no evidence of negligence, as the respondent was unaware of the vehicle's accident history, and the case was pleaded solely in negligence rather than breach of contract.