Sexstone v. City of Rochester
| Decision Date | 15 May 1969 |
| Citation | 301 N.Y.S.2d 887,32 A.D.2d 737 |
| Parties | C. William SEXSTONE and J. Gary Sexstone, Appellants, v. CITY OF ROCHESTER and Alan C. Hanford, Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Melvin W. Buetens, Rochester, for appellants.
Maas, Weinstein & Hutchings, Leonard E. Maas, Rochester, for respondent Hanford.
Robert A. Feldman, Melvin Bressler, Rochester, for respondent City.
Before DEL VECCHIO, J.P., and WITMER, GABRIELLI MOULE and HENRY, JJ.
The complaint against the city stated a cause of action for negligence against the city.
The issuance by it of a certificate of occupancy for a building with violations would be a violation of Multiple Residence Law § 302(3). It should have been obvious to the city that in view of Multiple Residence Law § 302(5) the certificate would be relied on by one purchasing the property. Since there was a duty to issue the certificate in a careful manner with knowledge that the plaintiffs would rely thereon, the city should be liable for the negligent issuance, if such was the case. (Glanzer v. Shepard, 233 N.Y. 236, 135 N.E. 275, 23 A.L.R. 1425; Ultramares Corporation v. Touche, 255 N.Y. 170, 174 N.E. 441, 74 A.L.R. 1139.) This act did not involve discretion, and the municipality is liable for its wrongful action in issuing it. (Bernadine v. City of New York, 294 N.Y. 361, 365, 62 N.E.2d 604, 605, 161 A.L.R. 364.) The filing of the notice of claim was timely under General Municipal Law §§ 50--e and 50--i, as it was within ninety days after the violations were discovered. The running of the ninety day period should be measured not from the time of the negligent act but from the date the negligent act produced injury to the plaintiffs. (Konar v. Monro Muffler Shops of Rochester, Inc., 28 A.D.2d 642, 280 N.Y.S.2d 812; Durant v. Grange Silo Company, 12 A.D.2d 694, 207 N.Y.S.2d 691.)
Judgment and order dismissing complaint as to defendant city unanimously reversed and motion denied, and order granting motion to dismiss as to defendant Hanford unanimously affirmed, all without costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haslund v. City of Seattle
...authority or no authority. See, e.g., Ellis v. City Council, 222 Cal.App.2d 490, 35 Cal.Rptr. 317 (1963); Sexstone v. Rochester, 32 A.D.2d 737, 301 N.Y.S.2d 887 (1969); See also 154 East Park Ave. Corp. v. Long Beach, 76 Misc.2d 445, 350 N.Y.S.2d 974 (1973) (warranty theory); Cf. Belle Harb......
-
Wilson v. Nepstad
...law); State v. Jennings, 555 P.2d 248 (Alaska 1976); Adams v. State, 555 P.2d 235 (Alaska 1976); Sexstone v. City of Rochester, 32 A.D.2d 737, 301 N.Y.S.2d 887 (1969); Coffey v. City of Milwaukee, 74 Wis.2d 526, 247 N.W.2d 132 (1976); Dutton v. Bognor Regis Urban District Council, (1972) 1 ......
-
Manors of Inverrary XII Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Atreco-Florida, Inc.
...due to fire, but municipality had no duty to insurer of tenants, nor to tenants who suffered loss); Sexstone v. City of Rochester, 32 A.D.2d 737, 301 N.Y.S.2d 887 (N.Y.App.Div.1969) (City issuing certificate of occupancy for building with violations liable to buyer for cost of violation cor......
-
Garrett v. Holiday Inns, Inc.
...app. den. 47 N.Y.2d 710, 419 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 393 N.E.2d 1049; Doyle v. 800, Inc., 72 A.D.2d 761, 421 N.Y.S.2d 379; Sexstone v. City of Rochester, 32 A.D.2d 737, 301 N.Y.S.2d 887). 4 While such liability would plainly encompass direct injury to appellants, it may also properly include the eco......