Case ID: ny-2d_87/html/0931-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[663 NE2d 909, 640 NYS2d 868]
    Damion Rodriguez, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Saverina Galvan, et al., Respondents, v Oak Point Management, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants.
    Argued January 10, 1996;
    decided February 8, 1996
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Jonathan R. Walsh, Elmsford, and William K. Capshaw for appellant.
    
      Leonard W. Krouner, Albany, and Mullen Morris & Lutzky, New York City (Joseph T. Mullen of counsel), for respondents.
    
      Sullivan & Liapakis, P. C., New York City (John M. Tomsky of counsel), for New York State Trial Lawyers’ Association, amicus curiae.
    
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, defendant Oak Point Management’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it granted and the certified question answered in the negative.

Under the circumstances of this case, defendant had no duty to secure the front door of the residential apartment building it owned and operated in order to protect passersby from the threat of criminal actions by individuals engaging in drug-related activity in or around the building (see, Muniz v Flohern, Inc., 77 NY2d 869; Waters v New York City Hous. Auth., 69 NY2d 225). Although the infant plaintiff happened to be visiting one of the building’s tenants, his position was no different from that of any other passerby at the time he was shot on the street some 191 feet from the front of the building. At that point, his relationship to a building tenant was a mere fortuity having nothing to do with the circumstances surrounding the shooting. Accordingly, defendant Oak Point Management should have been granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.