Opinion
March 23, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.).
Plaintiff Rudel was robbed at knifepoint on the second floor of defendant National Jewelry's building located in the diamond district of Manhattan. Rudel suffered personal injuries and valuable gems were taken.
We agree with the IAS Court that questions of fact exist as to the liability of the owner and defendant managing agent for the loss and injuries. "[A] landlord has a duty to maintain minimal security measures, related to a specific building itself, in the face of foreseeable criminal intrusion upon tenants." (Miller v State of New York, 62 N.Y.2d 506, 513; see also, Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 N.Y.2d 507.) Here, the building is located in the diamond district. The presence of one unarmed security guard on the ground floor without other security precautions presents a jury question as to whether the duty owed was breached and the injury foreseeable.
However, liability may not be imposed on the defendant security guard company. Plaintiffs are not third-party beneficiaries of the contract between the defendant managing agent and defendant security guard company (Bernal v. Pinkerton's Inc., 52 A.D.2d 760, affd 41 N.Y.2d 938; Herqing v. New York Yankees, 166 A.D.2d 253, 255). The defendant security guard company did not assume a special duty of care to plaintiffs and the imposition of liability against it would contravene sound public policy governing the orbit of duty owed to non-contracting parties (see, Eaves Brooks Costume Co. v. Y.B.H. Realty Corp., 76 N.Y.2d 220, 226-227; compare, Palka v. Service Master Mgt. Servs. Corp., 83 N.Y.2d 579).
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Rubin, Ross, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.