Wade Clark Mulcahy LLP

When it comes to determining premises liability, just because a government agency is responsible for a premises, that does not automatically mean the entire municipality itself is responsible just by virtue of controlling that agency. As with any entity, for a party to be liable for a tort that occurs on its property due to a dangerous or defective condition, they either had to create it or it must be shown they owned, controlled, maintained, or had special use of the property. This principle applied just the same in the case Rafael Acevedo v. Hope Gardens I, LLC, et al. After Plaintiff slipped and fell in a staircase on New Year’s Eve 2019, he filed suit against multiple entities, including both the City of New York and the New York City Housing Authority.

While the New York City Housing Authority was the actual owner of the property, having leased it to the first-named defendant, the lower court granted the City of New York’s motion for summary judgment to be let out of the case. While Plaintiff appealed this decision, the Second Department upheld it as they found there was no evidence that the City of New York met any of the criteria for a finding of liability.

This ruling is interesting as it seems almost in someway similar to the relationship between a subsidiary company and its parent company or a corporation/LLC and its shareholders/members, with the New York City Housing Authority in this case being the former and the City of New York being the latter. While no one would deny that the Housing Authority answers to the City of New York, the City of New York did not have any direct control of the property with that being done through the Housing Authority. If you are on the Plaintiff side, keep this in mind to ensure that you are suing the right entity; if you are the Defendant side, this may be a valuable defense to bring up.