Slip and fall accidents can happen in an instant, but the consequences can last a lifetime. Across New York, courts have handed down some of the nation’s most significant verdicts and settlements in these cases—proof of how seriously negligence is treated when property owners fail to protect the public. For victims, these cases are a reminder that choosing the right attorney makes all the difference.
In Suffolk County and throughout Long Island, The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. has been standing up for injured clients for decades. With a proven record of success, the firm has helped victims recover the compensation they need to rebuild their lives. To understand the importance of strong legal representation in a slip and fall situation, let’s take a closer look at five of New York’s largest and most impactful slip and fall cases.
Case 1: Steffens v. Sachem Central School District (2021, Suffolk County)
Year / Decision Date: The Appellate Division, Second Department issued its decision on January 27, 2021.
Facts: On the morning of January 19, 2016, the plaintiff was walking through the front parking lot of Merrimac Elementary School in Suffolk County when she slipped on a patch of black ice. The ice had formed in a cracked and sunken section of pavement, a spot where water regularly collected and froze.
Legal Issue: The school district argued that the case should be dismissed at the summary judgment stage, claiming there was no evidence it had notice of the icy condition. The legal question was whether the district had a duty to maintain the lot, whether the condition was foreseeable, and whether there was enough evidence to create a triable issue of fact about notice.
Outcome: The court denied the district’s motion for summary judgment. By doing so, it allowed the case to proceed to trial, recognizing that a jury could reasonably find the district had constructive notice of the hazard.
Lessons from the Case:
- Outdoor slip and fall cases can succeed when the hazard is recurring or tied to obvious surface defects, such as cracked pavement where ice predictably forms.
- Plaintiffs don’t need to prove the defendant knew the exact moment the ice formed—constructive notice (what a reasonable property owner should have known) can establish liability.
- Evidence such as weather records, pavement conditions, and maintenance history often proves decisive in these cases.
How Gacovino Helps in Similar Situations: At The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C., the team is skilled in handling weather-related slip and fall claims. They gather meteorological data, review maintenance and complaint histories, and consult with experts on surface conditions to demonstrate how a hazard developed. This type of detailed evidence is often what keeps a case alive past summary judgment and puts it before a jury. For Suffolk County residents injured in similar circumstances, Gacovino’s experience with local property standards and winter conditions can make all the difference.
Case 2: Vincent v. Landi (2014)
Year / Decision: Reported in 2014 (Vincent v. Landi, 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 08527), though the incident and trial record date back earlier.
Facts: The plaintiff arrived at work in the afternoon and noticed water streaming off the roof onto a walkway. Later that day, he slipped on that very walkway. Testimony conflicted about when the property owner had last inspected or repaired the roof, and whether black ice had formed as a result of the runoff. Multiple witnesses confirmed that the area was slippery.
Legal Issue: The court had to decide whether the property owner either knew, or should reasonably have known, about the recurring dangerous condition caused by roof runoff and freezing water, and whether reasonable steps were taken to correct or warn about it. The defense also challenged whether the jury’s verdict was supported by the evidence.
Outcome: The jury’s decision in favor of the plaintiff was upheld. The appellate court found there was ample evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that the property owner was aware—or should have been aware—of the hazard and failed to act.
Lessons from the Case:
- Documentation of roof leaks, runoff, ice formation, and witness testimony can be highly persuasive.
- Even if the injured party didn’t notice the hazard beforehand, juries can still find liability if there is enough circumstantial proof that the owner had notice.
- The overall weight of testimony, maintenance history, and conditions on-site often determines whether a verdict holds up.
How Gacovino Makes the Difference: Attorneys at The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. excel at assembling weather data, maintenance logs, roof inspection records, deposition testimony, and local code evidence to prove negligence. Their knowledge of Long Island building practices and winter conditions gives Suffolk County clients a critical edge in cases like Vincent.
Want a Free Confidential Consultation?
Case 3: Angeles v. County of Suffolk (2023)
Year / Decision: Appellate Division, Second Department, December 27, 2023 (corrected February 2024).
Facts: Nicole Angeles sued Suffolk County after a fall left her injured. In March 2021, a Suffolk County jury awarded her $634,000 for past pain and suffering and $111,000 for future pain and suffering over ten years.
Legal Issue: The County appealed, arguing that the jury’s award was excessive and that the evidence did not support the verdict. They also filed a motion under CPLR 4404 to have the verdict set aside.
Outcome: The appellate court rejected the County’s arguments and upheld the jury’s decision, leaving Angeles with a $745,000 total award for her pain and suffering.
Lessons from the Case:
- Even without astronomical medical bills, pain and suffering damages can amount to significant compensation.
- New York’s appellate courts are generally reluctant to disturb jury verdicts if there is credible evidence in the record.
- Careful documentation of medical treatment, consistent testimony, and credible expert support can sustain a substantial award.
How Gacovino Excels in Such Cases: The attorneys at The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. know how to work with medical experts to translate an injury into a compelling narrative for the jury. By thoroughly presenting evidence of pain, lifestyle changes, and future limitations, they ensure that clients receive the full measure of justice—even when defendants attempt to reduce or overturn jury awards.
Case 4: Dowdy v. Brooklyn Hospital Center (2020)
Year / Decision: Supreme Court, Kings County, 2020 (New York Slip Op. 51586(U)).
Facts: On December 9, 2015, the plaintiff slipped and fell just outside a hospital cafeteria. She alleged there was a slippery substance on the floor, though hospital staff claimed inspections had shown nothing unusual. There were no warning signs, mats, or clear records of cleaning at the time of the fall.
Outcome: The jury found the hospital 60% responsible and the plaintiff 40% responsible under New York’s comparative fault rules. Despite the shared liability, the damages were significant:
- $500,000 for past pain and suffering
- $1,000,000 for future pain and suffering (over 25 years)
- $180,084 for past medical expenses
- $31,000 for lost earnings
- $1,100,000 for future medical expenses
Lessons from the Case:
- Seemingly minor hazards in institutional settings can lead to life-altering injuries with high long-term costs.
- Property owners often claim they lacked notice of a hazard, but evidence about inspection routines and cleaning protocols is critical.
- Comparative fault may reduce an award, but when the defendant bears the majority of responsibility, damages can still be substantial.
How Gacovino Strengthens These Claims: The team at The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. is skilled at uncovering gaps in institutional safety practices—whether that means reviewing maintenance schedules, questioning staff about inspection frequency, or comparing policies to industry standards. By showing how negligence stacks up against the harm caused, Gacovino’s attorneys maximize recovery even when comparative fault is in play.
Why The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. is the Best Choice
Based on these cases, here is how the Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. stands out:
Local Knowledge & Court Experience
The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. works in Suffolk County, Long Island, and throughout New York state. Their team knows the local courthouse practices, judges, relevant building code or municipal obligations, inspection history, winter weather, snow/ice/black ice patterns, school districts, commercial property norms. This local expertise lets them anticipate defense strategies like summary judgment motions and respond effectively.
Strong Investigation & Evidence Gathering
Cases like Vincent v. Landi and Steffens show that proof of roof leaks, water runoff, pavement defects, cracked or depressed surfaces matter. The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. excels at collecting meteorological or weather data, maintenance logs, eyewitness statements, expert inspections (e.g., engineers or pavement experts), roof or building inspection records, photographs soon after the event.
Medical Expert Support for Present & Future Damages
In cases like Dowdy, future medical care, chronic pain, future suffering are major parts of damage. The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. has the relationships and experience to bring in medical experts, life care planners, economists, so that future costs are well documented—vital for a fuller compensation.
Ability to Take Strong Cases Past Motions & Summations
As seen in Steffens, Vincent, and Angeles, many defendants will try to end cases early with summary judgment or motions challenging damages. The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. has shown in other firm’s records the capability to resist those motions when facts are there. That means your case is more likely to proceed to trial if needed, and not be dismissed prematurely.
Client-Centered Advocacy
Many large verdicts or settlements are won because attorneys put in the time to properly represent the victim’s story—how the injury has changed their daily life, work, future. The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. is known for working closely with clients to ensure that this narrative, supported by evidence, is powerful.
Why The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. Is the Right Choice for Your Slip and Fall Case
These landmark slip and fall cases across New York show just how serious the consequences of negligence can be—and how life-changing the results are when victims pursue justice. From multimillion-dollar verdicts to complex settlements against corporations and public agencies, the common thread is clear: success depends on having experienced, relentless legal representation.
For Suffolk County residents and clients throughout New York, The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. is that trusted advocate. With decades of experience, a deep understanding of New York premises liability law, and a proven record of securing maximum compensation, the firm has built its reputation as one of the strongest voices for injured victims.
When you choose Gacovino, you’re not just hiring a lawyer—you’re gaining a dedicated partner who knows how to uncover the truth, hold negligent parties accountable, and fight until you get the results you deserve. If you or a loved one has been hurt in a slip and fall accident, make the choice that countless New Yorkers have already made: trust The Law Offices of Steven Gacovino, P.C. to protect your future. If we don’t win, you don’t pay! Call today for a free consultation at 844-692-1200.
Related Links
Quick Contact
Have a legal question? Send us a message and we’ll get back to you shortly. We’re here to help with honest answers and trusted guidance.
Reviews
These guys were the most wonderful people I’ve ever had the pleasure of working with. I trully felt like they were fighting for me every step of the way!