From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bruhns v. Antonelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 23, 1998
255 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Summary

In Bruhns v. Antonelli, 255 AD2d 478 (2nd Dept. 1998), the court concluded that the listing real estate agent who provided access to premises to a broker, who was injured while showing the property, owed no duty of care to the injured broker and could not be held liable for the existence of an allegedly dangerous condition on the property.

Summary of this case from Fabrizi v. Estate of Fitchett

Opinion

November 23, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The injured plaintiff, a licensed real estate broker, was injured on the subject premises while showing the premises to prospective buyers. The injured plaintiff had gained access to the premises from the defendant R. J. Smith Realtors, Inc. (hereinafter the respondent), who was the listing real estate agent for the property. The respondent moved for summary judgment arguing, inter alia, that it owed no duty to the injured plaintiff.

As a general rule, liability for a dangerous condition on property is predicated upon ownership, occupancy, control, or special use ( see, Millman v. Citibank, 216 A.D.2d 278). Upon our review of the record, we find no evidence that would raise an issue of fact as to any of these elements. The respondent owed no duty of care to the injured plaintiff, and may not be held liable for the existence of an allegedly dangerous condition on the property. Thus, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the respondent.

Mangano, P. J., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bruhns v. Antonelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 23, 1998
255 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

In Bruhns v. Antonelli, 255 AD2d 478 (2nd Dept. 1998), the court concluded that the listing real estate agent who provided access to premises to a broker, who was injured while showing the property, owed no duty of care to the injured broker and could not be held liable for the existence of an allegedly dangerous condition on the property.

Summary of this case from Fabrizi v. Estate of Fitchett
Case details for

Bruhns v. Antonelli

Case Details

Full title:MARION BRUHNS et al., Appellants, v. GAETANO ANTONELLI, Defendant, and R…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 23, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
680 N.Y.S.2d 639

Citing Cases

Schwalb v. Kulaski

In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49…

Rodriguez v. E P Assoc.

Liability for a dangerous condition on or within a property, is instead predicated upon occupancy, ownership,…