Opinion
June 29, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kinds County (G. Aronin, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
"To recover damages from an owner of real property for injuries caused by the acts of criminals on the premises, a plaintiff must produce evidence indicating "that the owner knew or should have known of the probability of conduct on the part of third persons which was likely to endanger "the safety of those lawfully on the premises" ( Francis v. Ocean Vil. Apts., 222 A.D.2d 551; see, Jacqueline S. v. City of New York, 81 N.Y.2d 288, 294-295; Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc. 50 N.Y.2d 507, 519-520; Segale v. Nu Wave Mar., 244 A.D.2d 326; Davis v. Jo-Ern Realty Corp., 239 A.D.2d 458; Howard-Seay v. Dorchester Towers Assocs., 227 A.D.2d 525, 526). The plaintiffs failed to submit evidence raising a triable issue of fact as to whether the incident in question was reasonably foreseeable ( see, Segale v. Nu Wave Mar., supra; Davis v. Jo-Ern Realty Corp., supra; Iannelli v. Powers, 114 A.D.2d 157, 162-163). Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the deposition testimony of the plaintiff Ray Senises that the police recently had been called to the building to break up a dispute or argument does not constitute evidence of any criminal activity on or around the premises. Therefore, the defendant's motion should have been granted.
Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.