Opinion
December 15, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.).
Contrary to defendant-appellant's argument, it owed plaintiff a duty of care since, pursuant to its agreement with defendant City of New York, defendant-appellant was solely responsible for the repair and maintenance of the subject golf course and plaintiff, as a golfing patron upon that course, was reasonably within the class of individuals entitled, and, indeed, compelled to rely upon defendant-appellant's satisfactory performance of its exclusive maintenance undertaking ( see, Palka v. Service-master Mgt. Servs. Corp., 83 N.Y.2d 579, 584-590).
Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.