The balance between providing reasonably safe conditions on property as a landowner and avoiding saddling a landowner with an unobtainable duty of care is exemplified in Solazzo v. New York City Trans. Auth.  — the New York Court of Appeals’ recent decision regarding constructive notice and recurring conditions.  In this case, the plaintiff injured himself when he slipped on a wet, slippery subway station floor during an ongoing storm.  The Court rejected the plaintiff’s assertion that the property owners had constructive notice of the condition because there was a recurring condition of water accumulating in the same general area during inclement weather. 

The dissenting Justices at the Appellate Division, First Department appeared [see comments below] to embrace, at least in this case, the possibility that a general awareness of a recurring defective condition is sufficient to assess liability against the property owners in this case.