Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003

Cerda v. 2962 Decatur Avenue Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 24, 2003

306 A.D.2d 169; 761 N.Y.S.2d 220; 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7302

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

Scurry v. New York City Hous. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
Gonzalez v. Georgetown Plaza (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Gonzalez v. Georgetown Plaza (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Estate of Murphy v. New York City Hous. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
Estate of Murphy v. New York City Hous. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
Roldan v. New York City Hous. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
Estate of Faughey Ex Rel. Adam v. New 56-79 IG Associates, L.P. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Flynn v. Esplanade Gardens, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Nash v. Port Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
Cynthia B. v. 3156 Hull Ave. Equities, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Lopez v. Barrett T.B. Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Flores v. Dearborne Management, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Buckeridge v. Broadie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered November 14, 2001, which granted defendants’ summary judgment motion dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly granted defendant landlords summary judgment in this personal injury case. As in Rivera v New York City Hous. Auth. (239 AD2d 114 [1997]), the alleged proximate cause of the tenant’s injuries, the landlord’s negligence in failing to repair a broken front door lock thereby allowing the intruder-perpetrator’s entry, is seriously undermined by strong evidence of the unforeseeable existence of a preconceived criminal conspiracy to murder the tenant, such that “it [is] most unlikely that any reasonable security measures would have deterred the criminal participants” (id. at 115, citing Tarter v Schildkraut, 151 AD2d 414 [1989], lv *170denied 74 NY2d 616 [1989]). Here, the record shows that the tenant, an ex-drug dealer, was assaulted by a team of assassins which was waiting for him in the hallway outside his apartment at the exact time, in the early morning, that he arrived home from work, which team included at least a third member outside the building who coordinated with the attackers by walkie-talkie, and who made statements indicating that they were specifically targeting the tenant.

Plaintiffs reliance on Burgos v Aqueduct Realty Corp. (92 NY2d 544 [1998]) is inapposite inasmuch as that case had no evidence of a criminal conspiracy to harm the injured party, not to mention one as carefully planned and executed as the one at bar. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.