Opinion
June 23, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garson, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the defendants Moses Klug and Esther Klug, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
The defendants Moses Klug and Esther Klug established that they were not responsible for the maintenance and repair of the leased premises ( see, Wright v. Feinblum, 220 A.D.2d 660). The plaintiff failed to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of material questions of fact ( see, Frank Corp. v. Federal Ins. Co., 70 N.Y.2d 966, 967). Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to allege a violation by the Klugs of any specific provision of the Administrative Code of the City of New York sufficient to impose liability ( see, Kilimnik v. Mirage Rest., 223 A.D.2d 530; Aprea v. Carol Mgt. Corp., 190 A.D.2d 838).
Miller, J.P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.