This action arises out of a March 18, 2019 trip-and-fall accident (the “Accident”) that occurred in the lobby of the Suffolk County Supreme Court Courthouse located at 1 Court Street, Riverhead, New York (the “Courthouse”).
Plaintiff Carole Gutterman was using a cane as she went through the Courthouse’s security checkpoint due to a prior, unrelated, motor vehicle accident. Gutterman sustained injuries as a result of stepping onto a platform.
Defendant Suffolk County sought to preclude the Court from admitting the report of Plaintiff’s expert, Richard J. Robbins, R.A.
The County asserted that Robbins’ “entire report is based upon the false premises that Plaintiff either stepped up onto the security platform, or attempted to step onto the platform, and that she was reaching for her belongings or attempted to reach for he belongings at the time that her accident occurred.”
Architecture Expert Witness
Richard James Robbins, R.A is a professional with over thirty years of experience in the administration and supervision of multi-million dollar design & construction contracts in the public & private sector.
Discussion by the Court
Robbins is an architect who inspected the Courthouse and provided an expert opinion regarding the conditions of its safety screening area.
Robbins opined that the platform from which Plaintiff sought to retrieve her cane presented three dangerous conditions:
- At a height of 6 3/8 inches, the platform adjacent to the conveyer belt is inaccessible to people with a disability;
- The color of the floor adjacent to the conveyer belt and the presence of a black-colored mat “makes it difficult for pedestrians to discern the presence of the significant change in level which exists in their immediate path of travel . . . .”; and
- The barrier reduced the clear width of the platform to 26 inches, whereas 36 inches of clearance is required.
Regardless of whether Plaintiff stepped on to the platform, the Robbins Report still reached several relevant conclusions, namely that the platform at 6 3/8 inches was too high, that the color of the floor and platform made it difficult to discern the change in height, and that the width to clear the barrier was too narrow. All of these conclusions could be relevant to determine the cause of the accident, and, therefore, be helpful to the trier of fact in determining whether the County was negligent.
Held
The Court denied the motion to preclude Richard Robbins’ expert report.
Key Takeaway
The proponent of the expert testimony has the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the testimony is competent, relevant, and reliable. In evaluating the admissibility of expert testimony, the trial court must consider whether: (i) the witness is qualified as an expert on the topic at issue; (ii) the expert’s opinion is based on reliable data and methodology; and (iii) the expert’s opinion will assist the trier of fact.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Gutterman V. Suffolk County |
| Docket Number: | 2:20cv4168 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, New York Eastern |
| Order Date: | March 24, 2026 |
Leave a Reply