From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

610 W. Realty LLC v. Riverview W. Contracting LLC

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 3, 2017
146 A.D.3d 422 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

01-03-2017

610 WEST REALTY LLC, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. RIVERVIEW WEST CONTRACTING LLC, et al., Defendants, B&V Contracting Enterprises, Inc., Defendant–Respondent.

Silverman Shin & Byrne PLLC, New York (Andrew Achiron of counsel), for appellant. London Fischer LLP, New York (Brian A. Kalman of counsel), for respondent.


Silverman Shin & Byrne PLLC, New York (Andrew Achiron of counsel), for appellant.

London Fischer LLP, New York (Brian A. Kalman of counsel), for respondent.

SAXE, J.P., MOSKOWITZ, GISCHE, KAHN, GESMER, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered August 4, 2015, which, insofar as appealed from, granted the motion of defendant B&V Contracting Enterprises, Inc. (B&V) for summary judgment dismissing the fourth cause of action alleging negligence as against it, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff was the sponsor of a condominium construction project, on which defendant Riverview West Contracting LLC was the general contractor, and B&V was a subcontractor hired by Riverview to perform certain carpentry and drywall work. Following the completion and opening of the condominium complex, it was discovered that B&V had performed certain of its work negligently.

The court properly dismissed the fourth cause of action alleging negligence against B&V, and seeking the cost of remediation and repair of B&V's negligent work, because plaintiff cannot recover contract damages under a negligence theory (see 532 Madison Ave. Gourmet Foods v. Finlandia Ctr., 96 N.Y.2d 280, 727 N.Y.S.2d 49, 750 N.E.2d 1097 [2001] ; Residential Bd. of Mgrs. of Zeckendorf Towers v. Union Sq.–14th Assoc., 190 A.D.2d 636, 594 N.Y.S.2d 161 [1st Dept.1993] ). The fact that B&V's work had to do with fire-safing and fire-stopping the premises is not sufficient to create an independent duty to plaintiff (see Church v. Callanan Indus., 99 N.Y.2d 104, 112, 752 N.Y.S.2d 254, 782 N.E.2d 50 [2002] ), and there is no allegation that B&V launched a force or instrument of harm (see Espinal v. Melville Snow Contrs., 98 N.Y.2d 136, 140, 746 N.Y.S.2d 120, 773 N.E.2d 485 [2002] ).


Summaries of

610 W. Realty LLC v. Riverview W. Contracting LLC

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 3, 2017
146 A.D.3d 422 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

610 W. Realty LLC v. Riverview W. Contracting LLC

Case Details

Full title:610 WEST REALTY LLC, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. RIVERVIEW WEST CONTRACTING…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jan 3, 2017

Citations

146 A.D.3d 422 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
146 A.D.3d 422
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 28