angelique.sabia-candero@wilsonelser.com

Download my vCard

Download my Bio

Angelique Sabia-Candero defends property owners, corporations and property management companies in a wide range of general liability matters.

Prior to joining Wilson and Elser, Angelique gained experience as a civil litigator specializing in medical malpractice defense.

While in law school, Angelique served as a judicial intern to the Honorable Justice Richard Lee Price in the New York State Supreme Court, Bronx County and interned with the NYC Public Advocate, Letitia James. In addition, Angelique held internships with the NYC Law Department's Tort Division and the NYC Housing Authority.

    Education

    • New York Law School (J.D., 2015)
      • cum laude
    • University of Hawaii at Manoa (B.A., 2011)

    Bar Admissions

    • New York
    • New Jersey

    Awards & Honors

    Selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® Ones to Watch™, 2026-2027

Angelique Sabia-Candero

Sabia-Candero and Laird Continue Winning Streak with Dismissal of Trip and Fall Case

Angelique Sabia-Candero (Associate-New York, NY) and Joseph Laird (Partner-White Plains, NY) secured summary judgment in the Supreme Court, Kings County Court on behalf of their housing company client in a trip and fall case. The plaintiff alleged she was injured when she stepped into the storm drain inlet affixed to the curb adjacent to the client's residential building. Angelique and Joe argued that the client is an improper party and entitled to summary judgment because it was not responsible for the public street or public storm system, which are exclusively maintained by the City of New York and the Department of Environmental Protection. In opposition, the plaintiff argued that Google Maps and Cyclomedia images demonstrated the client’s long history of using the curb area in connection with its landscaping work and suggested that its heavy equipment may have created the overturned curb inlet at issue. Angelique and Joe countered that three of the four images submitted by the plaintiff predated the client’s acquisition of the adjacent property by seven years, undermining the plaintiff’s claim that Wilson Elser’s client caused the condition. The court agreed and granted summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint and all cross-claims asserted against the housing company.

Angelique Sabia-Candero and Joseph Laird

Sabia-Candero and Laird Secure Summary Judgment in Slip and Fall Case

Angelique Sabia-Candero (Associate-New York, NY) and Joseph Laird (Partner-White Plains, NY) successfully moved in Queens County Supreme Court to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint and the City of New York’s cross-claims against Wilson Elser’s international bank client arising from the plaintiff’s alleged trip and fall on a sidewalk abutting a Queens residential property (the subject premises). At the time of the alleged accident, the subject premises was real estate owned by the bank. The plaintiff commenced the instant lawsuit against the bank, among others, seeking monetary damages for spinal injuries resulting in a two-level cervical discectomy and fusion. Contemporaneously, in a separate property dispute action involving the subject premises, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the lower court’s decision declining an order to show cause seeking to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale, which the court found was improperly issued to our bank client during an automatic bankruptcy stay. Resultantly, an order was issued vacating the judgment of foreclosure and sale, which was rendered void ab initio.

Before conducting party depositions, Angelique and Joe filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) and 3211(a)(7). They annexed the court orders issued in the related property dispute as supporting documentary evidence to establish that the bank did not own the subject premises on or prior to the plaintiff’s alleged accident. Additionally, they obtained Google Street View images depicting the sidewalk abutting the premises years before the loss, serving them on the plaintiff pursuant to a CPLR 4532-b Notice of Intention more than a month before filing the motion. The images were submitted to the court, along with site photographs disclosed by the plaintiff, to establish that the sidewalk remained in the same condition before and after the accident and to rebut the plaintiff’s claim that the bank caused or created the alleged defect. To supplement the documentary evidence tendered, Wilson Elser obtained an affirmation from an employee of a related mortgage corporation confirming that the bank did not own, occupy, or perform repairs at the premises before the accident and that no entity had been retained on the bank’s behalf to perform repairs or construction-related work. Finally, relevant property preservation records were submitted, indicating that the only services performed at the property on behalf of the client were site inspections to determine the property’s occupancy status.

The court granted Wilson Elser’s motion, rejecting the plaintiff’s arguments that the motion was premature and that issues of control and possession remained unresolved despite the ab initio determination.

Angelique Sabia-Candero and Joseph Laird

Sabia-Candero and Laird Secure Summary Judgment in Trench Drain Fall Case

Angelique Sabia-Candero (Associate-New York, NY) and Joseph Laird (Partner-White Plains, NY) obtained summary judgment in Kings County Supreme Court, Brooklyn, New York, on behalf of Wilson Elser’s sports club client in a premises liability action involving an allegedly defective trench drain grate. The plaintiff claimed she was injured while walking her kick scooter down the client’s driveway when its wheel allegedly became caught in a trench drain grate. She maintained that she felt the scooter stop before inexplicably losing consciousness. After regaining consciousness on the sidewalk, she noticed the drain grate for the first time and concluded that the scooter’s wheel had become lodged between the trench frame and grating cover. Critically, however, the plaintiff admitted that she never actually observed the alleged wheel entrapment. 

Angelique and Joe moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff could not identify the cause of her fall without resorting to speculation. They also established an independent basis for dismissal on lack of notice, supported by the inspection findings of Wilson Elser’s expert, a professional engineer. The engineer determined that the one-inch gap identified by the plaintiff matched the size of prefabricated frame slots, was narrower than the typical drain grates required by the NYC Department of Environmental Protection, and that the grate was properly maintained, code-compliant, and not dangerous or defective.

Although the plaintiff submitted an expert affirmation opining that the grate was unreasonably dangerous and violated various industry standards and regulations, the court rejected plaintiff’s counsel’s argument that the competing opinions created a “battle of the experts” requiring denial of summary judgment. The court found that the plaintiff’s expert relied on general and inapplicable rules and regulations rather than identifying any actual code or regulatory violations, and therefore failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the court granted summary judgment in full, dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint.

Angelique Sabia-Candero and Joseph Laird

Privacy Settings