Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1893–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Associates, Inc.green2 sentences2025Even if the TMS defendants' expert is correct that at the time of the accident the building complied with all applicable Building Code and Rules of City of New York provisions, compliance with applicable building codes and rules is not dispositive of whether they breached their duty of care under the common law ( see Kellman v 45 Tiemann Assoc. , 87 NY2d 871, 872 [1995]; compare Rivera v Nelson Realty, LLC , 7 NY3d 530 [2006] [finding "any duty to protect children from uncovered radiators remains that of the tenant, unless some other statute or regulation imposes it on the landlord," where the 2025Even if the TMS defendants' expert is correct that at the time of the accident the building complied with all applicable Building Code and Rules of City of New York provisions, compliance with applicable building codes and rules is not dispositive of whether they breached their duty of care under the common law ( see Kellman v 45 Tiemann Assoc. , 87 NY2d 871, 872 [1995]; compare Rivera v Nelson Realty, LLC , 7 NY3d 530 [2006] [finding "any duty to protect children from uncovered radiators remains that of the tenant, unless some other statute or regulation imposes it on the landlord," where the | 1 | 1 |
Rivera v. Nelson Realty, LLCgreen2 sentences2025Even if the TMS defendants' expert is correct that at the time of the accident the building complied with all applicable Building Code and Rules of City of New York provisions, compliance with applicable building codes and rules is not dispositive of whether they breached their duty of care under the common law ( see Kellman v 45 Tiemann Assoc. , 87 NY2d 871, 872 [1995]; compare Rivera v Nelson Realty, LLC , 7 NY3d 530 [2006] [finding "any duty to protect children from uncovered radiators remains that of the tenant, unless some other statute or regulation imposes it on the landlord," where the 2025Even if the TMS defendants' expert is correct that at the time of the accident the building complied with all applicable Building Code and Rules of City of New York provisions, compliance with applicable building codes and rules is not dispositive of whether they breached their duty of care under the common law ( see Kellman v 45 Tiemann Assoc. , 87 NY2d 871, 872 [1995]; compare Rivera v Nelson Realty, LLC , 7 NY3d 530 [2006] [finding "any duty to protect children from uncovered radiators remains that of the tenant, unless some other statute or regulation imposes it on the landlord," where the | 1 | 1 |
Cruz v. Skerittgreen1 sentence2025That the TMS defendants annexed the video to their summary judgment motion did not preclude them from challenging its admissibility because they did not rely on it to support the motion ( cf. Cruz v Skeritt , 140 AD3d 554, 554 [1st Dept 2016]). | 1 | 1 |
Meisels v. 1295 Union Equities Corp.green2 sentences2025Moreover, since the TMS defendants "made no showing of inspections of the fire escape before the accident, they 'failed to show lack of constructive notice as a matter of law'" ( Lombardi v Partnership 92 W., L.P. , 129 AD3d 547 [1st Dept 2015], quoting Showverer v Allerton Assoc ., 306 AD2d 144, 144 [1st Dept 2003]). 2025Moreover, since the TMS defendants "made no showing of inspections of the fire escape before the accident, they 'failed to show lack of constructive notice as a matter of law'" ( Lombardi v Partnership 92 W., L.P. , 129 AD3d 547 [1st Dept 2015], quoting Showverer v Allerton Assoc ., 306 AD2d 144, 144 [1st Dept 2003]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rodriguez v. Leggett Holdings, LLC
green
1 sentence2025The affidavit by plaintiff's expert architect, who inspected the fire escape and opined that it violated 1 RCNY 15-10(r)(2) by not having a guardrail around the open stairway hatch, when read in combination with defendant Luis F. Rodriguez-Vera's testimony that he thought he saw plaintiff "as he was stepping into the hole," are sufficient to raise triable issues as to whether the lack of a guardrail was a dangerous condition from which causation could be reasonably inferred ( see Yuet Chun Lee v 124-126 Mott Corp. , 212 AD3d 464 [1st Dept 2023]; Rodriguez v Leggett Holdings, LLC , 96 AD3d 555 | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Levinson v. 77 Perry Realty Corp.
green
1 sentence2025The affidavit by plaintiff's expert architect, who inspected the fire escape and opined that it violated 1 RCNY 15-10(r)(2) by not having a guardrail around the open stairway hatch, when read in combination with defendant Luis F. Rodriguez-Vera's testimony that he thought he saw plaintiff "as he was stepping into the hole," are sufficient to raise triable issues as to whether the lack of a guardrail was a dangerous condition from which causation could be reasonably inferred ( see Yuet Chun Lee v 124-126 Mott Corp. , 212 AD3d 464 [1st Dept 2023]; Rodriguez v Leggett Holdings, LLC , 96 AD3d 555 | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Lichtman v. Gibbons
green
2 sentences2025Although the TMS defendants established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment through plaintiff's deposition testimony that he could not remember the accident ( see Reed v Piran Realty Corp. , 30 AD3d 319 , 320 [1st Dept 2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 801 [2007]), plaintiff raised triable issues of fact in opposition to the motion. 2025Although the TMS defendants established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment through plaintiff's deposition testimony that he could not remember the accident ( see Reed v Piran Realty Corp. , 30 AD3d 319 , 320 [1st Dept 2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 801 [2007]), plaintiff raised triable issues of fact in opposition to the motion. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Gordon v. 476 Broadway Realty Corp.
green
2 sentences2025Moreover, since the TMS defendants "made no showing of inspections of the fire escape before the accident, they 'failed to show lack of constructive notice as a matter of law'" ( Lombardi v Partnership 92 W., L.P. , 129 AD3d 547 [1st Dept 2015], quoting Showverer v Allerton Assoc ., 306 AD2d 144, 144 [1st Dept 2003]). 2025Moreover, since the TMS defendants "made no showing of inspections of the fire escape before the accident, they 'failed to show lack of constructive notice as a matter of law'" ( Lombardi v Partnership 92 W., L.P. , 129 AD3d 547 [1st Dept 2015], quoting Showverer v Allerton Assoc ., 306 AD2d 144, 144 [1st Dept 2003]). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Tifft v. . Porter
green
1 sentence1952TMs rule was laid down in an early, and leading decision in Tifft v. Porter ( 8 N. Y. 516 [1853]) which has been very consistently followed. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Farmers' Loan Trust Co. v. . Kip
green
1 sentence1936(Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. Kip, 192 N. Y. 266, at p. 283 .) We find notMng in tMs wifi of Lyman N. Hine to change tMs fundamental rule. | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Great Western Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Harris
green
1 sentence1930Co. v. Harris, 198 U. S. 561 ; Lion Bonding & Surety Co. v. Karatz, 262 id. 77.) TMs doctrine rests upon the theory, previously adverted to, that by the sovereign power of the court appointing Mm he is intrusted merely with custody of the property as its officer or delegate, and tMs power of admimstration has no extraterritorial operation. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Fromme v. Lisner
neutral
1 sentence1923TMs rule is stated in Fromme v. Lisner ( 63 Hun, 290 ). | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Thorn v. . Knapp
green
1 sentence1916(Thorn v. Knapp, 42 N. Y. 474 , and cases cited.) * * * TMs rule should be applied with care and moderation, and I think should be confined to cases of bad faith in incorporating the justification in the pleading, and this can scarcely be said to be true under the Code, when the facts proved ought legitimately to go in mitigation of damages, because it seems incongruous to say that a failure to establish a justification may enhance the damages, and yet the facts proved under it may mitigate them.” Cruikshank, v. Gordon ( 118 N. Y. 178 ) was an action in slander for words imputing professional | 1 | 1916–1916 |
Cruikshank v. . Gordon
neutral
1 sentence1916(Thorn v. Knapp, 42 N. Y. 474 , and cases cited.) * * * TMs rule should be applied with care and moderation, and I think should be confined to cases of bad faith in incorporating the justification in the pleading, and this can scarcely be said to be true under the Code, when the facts proved ought legitimately to go in mitigation of damages, because it seems incongruous to say that a failure to establish a justification may enhance the damages, and yet the facts proved under it may mitigate them.” Cruikshank, v. Gordon ( 118 N. Y. 178 ) was an action in slander for words imputing professional | 1 | 1916–1916 |
Ford v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.
green
2 sentences1898In the Ford Case, 117 N. Y. 639 , 22 N. E. 946 , the same precise distinction is again made, and upon the second appeal ( 124 N. Y. 493 , 26 N. E. 1101 ), instead of being rejected, the distinction is practically, recognized and affirmed. 1898In the Ford Case, 117 N. Y. 639 , 22 N. E. 946 , the same precise distinction is again made, and upon the second appeal ( 124 N. Y. 493 , 26 N. E. 1101 ), instead of being rejected, the distinction is practically, recognized and affirmed. | 1 | 1898–1898 |
In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Morrison
neutral
1 sentence1898In the Ford Case, 117 N. Y. 639 , 22 N. E. 946 , the same precise distinction is again made, and upon the second appeal ( 124 N. Y. 493 , 26 N. E. 1101 ), instead of being rejected, the distinction is practically, recognized and affirmed. | 1 | 1898–1898 |
Connolly v. . Knickerbocker Ice Co.
neutral
1 sentence1893TMs rule is now too firmly settled in tMs state to be disturbed.” And in Connolly v. Ice Co., 114 N. Y. 104 , 21 N. E. | 1 | 1893–1893 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.