Landlord Not Liable for Lead Poisoning

LVT Number: 13704

Section 8 tenant sued landlord and NYCHA for damages after her child was diagnosed with lead paint poisoning. Tenant claimed NYCHA was negligent for not enforcing lead paint laws against landlord. NYCHA argued that since it didn't own the building, it wasn't responsible. The court ruled against tenant. Section 8 laws and regulations imposed no liability on NYCHA for lead paint conditions. And since NYCHA owed no special duty to tenant to inspect the apartment, there was no common law liability for negligence.

Section 8 tenant sued landlord and NYCHA for damages after her child was diagnosed with lead paint poisoning. Tenant claimed NYCHA was negligent for not enforcing lead paint laws against landlord. NYCHA argued that since it didn't own the building, it wasn't responsible. The court ruled against tenant. Section 8 laws and regulations imposed no liability on NYCHA for lead paint conditions. And since NYCHA owed no special duty to tenant to inspect the apartment, there was no common law liability for negligence. Landlord argued that there was no proof that tenant's child was exposed to lead paint while living in his building. The court ruled for landlord. Tenant and her child lived in landlord's building during 1991 and 1992. Blood tests taken during this period showed normal lead levels. Elevated blood levels, showing lead poisoning, didn't show up until more than seven months after tenant moved to another apartment building. The case was dismissed.

Sanchez v. Cheung: NYLJ, p. 35, col. 5 (11/3/99) (Sup. Ct. Queens; Kitzes, J)