Stark v. Port Auth. of New York & New Jersey, 224 A.D.2d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
Stark v. Port Auth. of New York & New Jersey, 224 A.D.2d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 2007 · …a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect at p. 682 ✓
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 2002 · …reservation of the right to enter the premises for the purpose of inspection and repair may constitute sufficient retention of control to permit a finding that the landlord had constructive notice of a defective condition provided a specific statutory violation exists and there … at p. 682 ✓
51 citation events (32 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Reid v. Interfaith Med. Ctr. (2×)
N.Y. Sup. Kings · 2026 · confidence medium
"A reservation of a right of entry may constitute sufficient retention of control to impose liability upon an out-of-possession landlord for injuries caused by a dangerous condition, where a 'a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect' " ( Bouima v Dacomi, Inc. , 36 AD3d at 739-740 , quoting Stark v Port Auth. of NY & N.J. , 224 AD2d 681, 682 [2d Dept 1996]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Yadegar v. International Food Market
N.Y. App. Div. · 2007 · confidence medium
“Reservation of a right of entry may constitute sufficient retention of control to impose liability upon an out-of-possession owner or lessor for injuries caused by a dangerous condition, but only when ‘a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect’ ” (Lowe-Barrett v City of New York, 28 AD3d 721 , 722 [2006], quoting Stark v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 224 AD2d 681, 682 [1996]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bouima v. Dacomi, Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2007 · confidence medium
A reservation of a right of entry may constitute sufficient retention of control to impose liability upon an out-of-possession landlord for injuries caused by a dangerous condition, where “a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect” (Stark v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 224 AD2d 681, 682 [1996]; see Guzman v Haven Plaza Hous.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lowe-Barrett v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
Reservation of a right of entry may constitute sufficient retention of control to impose liability upon an out-of-possession owner or lessor for injuries caused by a dangerous condition, but only when “a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect” (Stark v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 224 AD2d 681, 682 [1996]; see Guzman v Haven Plaza Hous.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Fucile v. Grand Union Co.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2000 · confidence medium
“Reservation of the right to enter the premises for the purpose of inspection and repair may constitute sufficient retention of control to permit a finding that the landlord had constructive notice of a defective condition provided a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect” (Stark v Port Auth., supra, at 682; see, Guz man v Haven Plaza Hous.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Duffy v. United States
S.D.N.Y. · 1999 · confidence medium
“It is well settled that an out-of-possession owner or lessor is not liable for injuries that occur on the premises unless the owner or lessor has retained control over the premises or is contractually obligated to repair or maintain the premises.” Stark v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 224 A.D.2d 681, 682 , 639 N.Y.S.2d 57, 58 (1996) (quoting Dalzell v. McDonald’s Corp., 220 A.D.2d 638, 639 , 632 N.Y.S.2d 635, 636 (1995)); see also Putnam v. Stout, 38 N.Y.2d 607 , 345 N.E.2d 319 , 381 N.Y.S.2d 848 (1976); Hecht v. Vanderbilt Assoc., 141 A.D.2d 696 , 529 N.Y.S.2d 818 (1988).
discussed Cited "see" Wilson v. Laung Hang Realty Corp.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2001 · signal: accord · confidence high
It is well settled that “an out-of-possession owner or lessor is not liable for injuries that occur on the premises unless the owner or lessor has retained control over the premises or is contractually obligated to repair unsafe conditions” (Berado v City of Mount Vernon, 262 AD2d 513, 514 ; accord, Stark v Port Auth., 224 AD2d 681 ).
discussed Cited "see" Rivera v. Wood
N.Y. App. Div. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
“It is well settled that an out-of-possession owner or lessor is not liable for injuries that occur on the premises unless that entity retained control of the premises or is contractually obligated to repair the unsafe condition” (Carvano v Morgan, 270 AD2d 222, 223 ; see, Stark v Port Auth., 224 AD2d 681 ; Bolden v New Mark & Co., 270 AD2d 221 ).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Caiazzo v. Angelone
N.Y. App. Div. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
Furthermore, the mechanical defect in the elevator cannot be considered structural (see generally, Levy v Daitz, 196 AD2d 454 ; Quinones v 27 Third City King Rest., 198 AD2d 23 ; see also, Stark v Port Auth., 224 AD2d 681 ; Kilimnik v Mirage Rest., 223 AD2d 530 ; Henderson v Hickory Pit Rest., 221 AD2d 161 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Maryanne B. Stark
v.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Feb 26, 1996.
224 A.D.2d 681
Cited by 41 opinions  |  Published

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated November 30, 1994, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff, an employee of Pan American World Airways[*682] (hereinafter Pan Am), was injured when she fell on an allegedly deteriorated sidewalk near the front entrance of Hangar 17 at John F. Kennedy Airport. At the time of the accident, Pan Am leased the hangar and the surrounding premises from the defendant. The lease agreement provided that Pan Am had exclusive possession and control of the premises and was responsible for maintenance and repairs. The defendant retained the right to enter the premises and to make repairs at Pan Am’s expense in the event Pan Am failed to fulfill its obligations.

"It is well settled that an out-of-possession owner or lessor is not liable for injuries that occur on the premises unless the owner or lessor has retained control over the premises or is contractually obligated to repair or maintain the premises” (Dalzell v McDonald’s Corp., 220 AD2d 638; see, Putnam v Stout, 38 NY2d 607). Reservation of the right to enter the premises for the purpose of inspection and repair may constitute sufficient retention of control to permit a finding that the landlord had constructive notice of a defective condition provided a specific statutory violation exists and there is a significant structural or design defect (see, Guzman v Haven Plaza Hous. Dev. Fund Co., 69 NY2d 559; Velazquez v Tyler Graphics, 214 AD2d 489; Gantz v Kurz, 203 AD2d 240; Manning v New York Tel. Co., 157 AD2d 264).

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint since the defendant was not obligated under the lease to repair the sidewalk and there was no evidence that it retained a sufficient degree of control over the premises to provide a basis for liability (see, O’Gorman v Gold Shield Sec. & Investigation, 221 AD2d 325; Love v Port Auth., 168 AD2d 222). The plaintiff failed to offer evidence of a significant structural defect or of any specific statutory violations.

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.