Case ID: ad2d_220/html/0345-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jimmy Rosario, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Eneria Polanco, et al., Respondents, v Bann Housing Corp. et al., Defendants, and Spiti, Inc., Appellant.
    [633 NYS2d 947]
   —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.