In the recent case, Sterlacci v. Wawa Food Mkt., No. A-3572-22, 2024 WL 3948611, (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Aug. 27, 2024), the Appellate Division reversed the Trial Court on the issue of whether the defendant had constructive notice of an ice condition.
In Sterlacci, the plaintiff went to the defendant’s gas station and convenience store between midnight and 12:30 am. Although it was not raining or snowing at that time, there was a snowstorm that started two days prior and continued into the day before the incident.
Per the plaintiff, it was freezing cold at the time of the incident. After exiting her vehicle, the plaintiff walked to the store’s entrance and slipped and fell on black ice, which the plaintiff claimed she did not see prior to falling.
The plaintiff then observed additional black and shiny ice on the parking lot surface, but no evidence of salt or sand where she parked to prevent someone from slipping. Plowed snow was observed pushed up along the edge of the parking lot in front of the parking spaces.
One of the defendant’s employees that was standing by the gas pumps responded to the incident and observed the ice on the ground. The employee admitted that the area where the plaintiff fell should have been salted or cordoned off.
The Trial Court granted summary judgment to the defendant, finding that the plaintiff’s claims were speculative because she did not demonstrate that the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the subject black ice.
The Court noted that the plaintiff did not have any difficulty driving on the roads of the parking lot, and also that the plaintiff could not prove constructive notice of the condition without expert support detailing how the ice had formed by the time the plaintiff fell.
The Court opined that the plaintiff had to explain how the ambient air and ground temperatures following the snowstorm caused black ice.
The Appellate Division reversed the Trial Court on the issue of constructive notice. The Appellate Division reasoned that it had snowed over the course of two days prior to the incident, that the defendant had plowed snow and ice to allow customers to access its store, and that the snow was pushed up in front of the parking spaces.
The Appellate Division held that a reasonable jury could infer, without an expert, that the snow plowed to the edge of the parking spaces melted during the day, and the resulting water leaked onto the parking lot and formed black ice with the freezing cold temperature that night based on the plaintiff’s photographs showing melted snow.
A reasonable jury could then find the defendant was negligent in failing to take precautions by applying a substance to prevent the ice from forming.
In the northeast, we frequently encounter black ice conditions. A good inspection procedure that ensures they are discovered quickly, particularly around areas where snow has been piled up, can prevent these slip and fall incidents and subsequent liability due to them.