Rosado v. Union Square 14th Street Assoc

Full title: ANTHONY ROSADO, Respondent, v. UNION SQUARE 14TH STREET ASSOCIATES et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 24, 1998

247 A.D.2d 316 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

668 N.Y.S.2d 463

Opinion

February 24, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.).

In view of the provision in the management agreement between the building and the agent requiring the latter to perform "routine supervision" of the former's service employees, we reject the agent's argument that, as a matter of law, it owed no duty of care to plaintiff ( see, Eaves Brooks Costume CO. v. Y.B.H. Realty Corp., 76 N.Y.2d 220, 226). We also see a need for further disclosure as to how the agent's routine supervisory duties were practically construed, particularly in relation to work assignments like that which allegedly put plaintiff at risk of coming into contact with an uninsulated steam pipe. The foregoing should not be understood as a limitation of issues of fact.

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.