Fairclough v. 679 Magenta LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fairclough v. 679 Magenta LLC

309 A.D.2d 619, 765 N.Y.S.2d 623, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10870

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 21, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 309 A.D.2d 619 (Fairclough v. 679 Magenta LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fairclough v. 679 Magenta LLC, 309 A.D.2d 619, 765 N.Y.S.2d 623, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth Thompson, J.), entered June 5, 2002, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured in a fire in the apartment that she rented from defendant landlord. She contends that the proximate cause of her injuries was the absence of an operating smoke detector in the apartment. However, it was not the [620]*620landlord’s duty to maintain or replace the smoke detector subsequent to the commencement of the apartment’s occupancy (Administrative Code of City of NY § 27-2045 [b]), and plaintiff has offered no evidence to rebut the building superintendent’s sworn statement that, immediately prior to the occupancy in question, he installed an operating smoke detector in the subject apartment. Accordingly, inasmuch as no triable issue has been raised as to whether the landlord failed to satisfy the duty it had under the Administrative Code to provide a working smoke detector in plaintiffs apartment at the commencement of the tenancy, the complaint was properly dismissed.

We have reviewed plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Rosenberger, Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth Thompson, J.), entered June 5, 2002, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured in a fire in the apartment that she rented from defendant landlord. She contends that the proximate cause of her injuries was the absence of an operating smoke detector in the apartment. However, it was not the [620]*620landlord’s duty to maintain or replace the smoke detector subsequent to the commencement of the apartment’s occupancy (Administrative Code of City of NY § 27-2045 [b]), and plaintiff has offered no evidence to rebut the building superintendent’s sworn statement that, immediately prior to the occupancy in question, he installed an operating smoke detector in the subject apartment. Accordingly, inasmuch as no triable issue has been raised as to whether the landlord failed to satisfy the duty it had under the Administrative Code to provide a working smoke detector in plaintiffs apartment at the commencement of the tenancy, the complaint was properly dismissed.

We have reviewed plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Rosenberger, Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 A.D.2d 619, 765 N.Y.S.2d 623, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fairclough-v-679-magenta-llc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack