Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Associates, Inc.
| Decision Date | 21 December 1995 |
| Citation | 662 N.E.2d 255,87 N.Y.2d 871,638 N.Y.S.2d 937 |
| Parties | , 662 N.E.2d 255 Dawn KELLMAN, Respondent, v. 45 TIEMANN ASSOCIATES, INC., Appellant, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.
An owner of land has a duty under the common law to maintain its premises "in a reasonably safe condition in view of all the circumstances, including the likelihood of injury to others, the seriousness of the injury, and the burden of avoiding the risk" (see, Basso v. Miller, 40 N.Y.2d 233, 241, 386 N.Y.S.2d 564, 352 N.E.2d 868). Contrary to defendant landlord's contentions, its alleged compliance with the applicable statutes and regulations is not dispositive of the question whether it satisfied its duties under the common law (see, Lesocovich v. 180 Madison Ave. Corp., 81 N.Y.2d 982, 599 N.Y.S.2d 526, 615 N.E.2d 1010).
The Appellate Division correctly concluded that the record presents triable issues of fact, regardless of whether the building is subject to or in compliance with section 53 of the Multiple Dwelling Law or section 27-380 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. Specifically, questions are presented (1) whether it was foreseeable that tenants would use the fire escape landings to clean windows or for other purposes, and, if so, (2) whether defendant landlord exercised reasonable care to protect tenants from injuring themselves by falling through the unguarded hatchways in fire escape landings.
Order affirmed, etc.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nipon v. Yale Club of N.Y.C.
...Inc., 1:05 Civ. 2841 (ENV)(MDG), 2006 WL 2335546 at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 10, 2006), citing Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Assocs., Inc., 87 N.Y.2d 871, 872, 662 N.E.2d 255, 256, 638 N.Y.S.2d 937, 938 (1995), Lamuraglia v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 299 A.D.2d 321, 324, 749 N.Y.S.2d 82, 86 (2d Dep't 2002) an......
-
Hamm v. Review Assocs., LLC
...or control of real property, has a duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition (see Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Assoc., Inc., 87 N.Y.2d 871, 872, 638 N.Y.S.2d 937, 662 N.E.2d 255 ; Basso v. Miller, 40 N.Y.2d 233, 241, 386 N.Y.S.2d 564, 352 N.E.2d 868 ). Indeed, "[a] landowner has......
-
Parslow v. Leake
...of the question whether [the resident defendants] satisfied [their] duties under the common law” ( Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Assoc., 87 N.Y.2d 871, 872, 638 N.Y.S.2d 937, 662 N.E.2d 255;cf. Hyman v. Queens County Bancorp, Inc., 3 N.Y.3d 743, 744–745, 787 N.Y.S.2d 215, 820 N.E.2d 859). In our vi......
-
Alnashmi v. Certified Analytical Group Inc.
...737 N.Y.S.2d 331, 763 N.E.2d 107; Chapman v. Silber, 97 N.Y.2d at 19, 734 N.Y.S.2d 541, 760 N.E.2d 329; Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Assoc., 87 N.Y.2d 871, 872, 638 N.Y.S.2d 937, 662 N.E.2d 255; Basso v. Miller, 40 N.Y.2d at 241, 386 N.Y.S.2d 564, 352 N.E.2d 868).1 Historically, as explained in Pa......