Altz v. Leiberson

Citation233 N.Y. 16,134 N.E. 703
PartiesALTZ v. LEIBERSON.
Decision Date28 February 1922
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Action by Ellen McN. Altz against Louis Leiberson. From a judgment of the Appellate Division, First Judicial Department (191 App. Div. 888,180 N. Y. Supp. 928), unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered on a verdict, defendant appeals by permission.

Affirmed.

See, also, 191 App. Div. 906,181 N. Y. Supp. 926.

Andrews, J., dissenting.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First department.

Edward P. Mowton, of New York City, for appellant.

Hector M. Hitchings, of New York City, for respondent.

CARDOZO, J.

[1] The plaintiff in November, 1917, was a tenant in the defendant's apartment house in the city of New York. She was injured while in her room by a falling ceiling, which the defendant, after timely notice of the danger, had omitted to repair. So, at least, the jury found, and the unanimous affirmance at the Appellate Division carries with it the presumption that there is evidence to sustain the verdict. The question to be determined is whether the omission was a breach of duty.

[2][3][4][5] At common law there was no duty resting on the landlord of an apartment house to repair the rooms demised. Golob v. Pasinsky, 178 N. Y. 458, 70 N. E. 973. His duty of repair was limited to those parts of the building which the occupants enjoyed in common. Dollard v. Roberts, 130 N. Y. 269, 29 N. E. 104,14 L. R. A. 238. The Tenement House Law (Consol. Laws, c. 61) has changed the measure of his burden:

“A tenement house' is any house or building, or portion thereof, which is either rented, leased, let or hired out, to be occupied, or is occupied, in whole or in part, as the home or residence of three families or more living independently of each other, and doing their cookingupon the premises, and includes apartment houses, flat houses and all other houses so occupied.' Tenement House Law, § 2, subd. 1.

‘Every tenement house and all the parts thereof shall be kept in good repair.’ Section 102.

The comprehensive sweep of this enactment admits of no exception. We are not at liberty to confine it to those parts of the building not included within the premises demised. The Legislature has said that the duty shall extend, not only to some parts, but to all. Apter words could hardly have been chosen wherewith to exclude division of responsibility between one part and another. The command of the statute, directed, as it plainly is, against the owner (cf. sections 76, 103, 104, 140), has thus changed the ancient rule. Whether ‘owner’ may mean at times a lessee of the whole building (section 140) is a question not before us. No doubt, before a right of action will accrue in favor of the tenant, there must be notice, actual or constructive, of the defect to be repaired. No doubt the defect itself must be one that has relation to the maintenance of the building as a tenantable habitation. This limitation results by implication from the context of the section, which forms part of an article entitled ‘sanitary provisions.’ The meaning is that the premises shall not be suffered to fall into decay. The duty to prevent this, which, in part at least, once rested upon the tenant, is now cast upon another.

[6][7] A narrower construction ignores, not only the letter of the statute, but the evil to be cured. A ‘tenement house,’ as the meaning is enlarged by the definition of the statute, may include the dwellings of the rich. In its primary and common application, it suggests the dwellings of the poor. Kitching v. Brown, 180 N. Y. 414, 422,73 N. E. 241,70 L. R. A. 742. We may be sure that the framers of this statute, when regulating tenement life, had uppermost in thought the care of those who are unable to care for themselves. The Legislature must have known that unless repairs in the rooms of the poor were made by the landlord, they would not be made by any one. The duty imposed became...

To continue reading

Request your trial
77 cases
  • Boston Housing Authority v. Hemingway
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • March 5, 1973
    ...various legal provisions have created for their benefit. Other courts have made similar holdings. The 1922 case of Altz v. Leiberson, 233 N.Y. 16, 18, 134 N.E. 703, 704, involved a comprehensive statute, commonly called the 'Tenement House Law,' which provided in part that: 'Every tenement ......
  • De Stefano v. Apts. Downtown, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 6, 2016
    ...effective remedy. Creating a private right of action for violation of public wrongs has solid legal provenance. See Altz v. Leiberson, 233 N.Y. 16, 134 N.E. 703, 704 (1922) (Cardozo, J.); Ezra Ripley Thayer, Public Wrong and Private Action, 27 Harv. L. Rev. 317, 320 (1914).12 Javins has bee......
  • Bolte v. City of N.Y.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • July 6, 2015
    ...dwelling to keep the same in a reasonably safe condition (Mas v. Two Bridges Associates, 75 N.Y.2d 680, 687 [1990] ); Altz v. Leiberson, 233 N.Y. 16, 17 [1921] [Holding that Tenement House Law (predecessor to Multiple Dwelling Law § 78 ) required that the owner of a multiple dwelling be kep......
  • King v. Moorehead
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 2, 1973
    ...merely space, but habitable space. The insight of Judge Cardozo given in a related context is particularly appropriate, Altz v. Leiberson, 233 N.Y. 16, 134 N.E. 703, l.c. 704 The Legislature must have known that unless repairs in the rooms of the poor were made by the landlord, they would n......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Benjamin N. Cardozo: The Tort Whisperer Nine Decades Later.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 95 No. 5, September 2021
    • September 1, 2021
    ...382, 384-385 (1916) (did not have to have privity of contract to sue manufacturer for a defective wheel made of wood); Altz v. Leiberson, 233 N.Y. 16 (1922) (landlord's liability); Cullings v. Goetz, 256 N.Y. 287, 289 (1931) (negligence against tenant in car garage for damage to car). See a......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT