Rosario v. Bann Housing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosario v. Bann Housing Corp.

220 A.D.2d 345, 633 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10450

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

DecidedOctober 26, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 220 A.D.2d 345 (Rosario v. Bann Housing Corp.) 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

Rosario v. Bann Housing Corp., 220 A.D.2d 345, 633 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10450 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Tar-gum, J.), entered on or about May 12, 1994, denying defendant-appellant’s motion to amend its answer to set forth counterclaims against plaintiffs’ parents, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In the absence of evidence that the parents had a duty with respect to the painting of their rented apartment (see, Multiple Dwelling Law § 78; Administrative Code of City of NY § 27-2013 [h]) or otherwise affirmatively created the condition giving rise to the injury (see, Barocas v Woolworth Co., 207 AD2d 145, 149), the allegations of the proposed counterclaims are insufficient to overcome the rule prohibiting claims based on negligent parental supervision (Holodook v Spencer, 36 NY2d 35; compare, Alharb v Sayegh, 199 AD2d 229). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Tar-gum, J.), entered on or about May 12, 1994, denying defendant-appellant’s motion to amend its answer to set forth counterclaims against plaintiffs’ parents, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In the absence of evidence that the parents had a duty with respect to the painting of their rented apartment (see, Multiple Dwelling Law § 78; Administrative Code of City of NY § 27-2013 [h]) or otherwise affirmatively created the condition giving rise to the injury (see, Barocas v Woolworth Co., 207 AD2d 145, 149), the allegations of the proposed counterclaims are insufficient to overcome the rule prohibiting claims based on negligent parental supervision (Holodook v Spencer, 36 NY2d 35; compare, Alharb v Sayegh, 199 AD2d 229). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 A.D.2d 345, 633 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosario-v-bann-housing-corp-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack