Landlord Not Liable for Super's Alleged Attack on Tenant's Guest

Tenant's guest sued landlord and the building's super after the guest was attacked in tenant's apartment. Tenant was away while his guest stayed there for several weeks. The building's super knocked on the door and told the guest he was dropping off mail. When the guest opened the apartment door, the guest said that three other men entered with the super and started beating him. He also said they asked him about money he knew nothing about. He said that the super left while the attack continued. Tenant claimed that: 1) the super was negligent, because he let the attackers in and didn't help him: 2) landlord was liable as the super's employer; and 3) the super directed the attack and acted within the scope of his job. After pretrial questioning, landlord and the super asked the court to dismiss the case. The court ruled for them, and tenant's guest appealed. The appeals court ruled for guest in part. There were questions of fact as to whether the super was negligent or deliberately set up the attack. So the case was reopened for trial on those parts of guest's claim. The claims against landlord remained dismissed because there was no proof that landlord knew anything about the super or the history of criminal activity in the building.

Nunez v. Caryl & Broadway, Inc.: NYLJ, 6/19/06, p. 30, col. 3 (App. Div. 1 Dept.; Andrias, JP, Marlow, Sweeny, McGuire, Malone, JJ)