Tenant Claims Emergency Abatement Work Wasn't Properly Done

LVT Number: 16987

Facts: Within a year of tenant's moving into an apartment in landlord's building, her child developed lead poisoning from lead-based paint in the apartment. The Department of Health inspected the apartment and ordered landlord to abate the condition. When landlord didn't do so, DOH referred the matter to HPD. HPD arranged for emergency abatement work in tenant's apartment.

Facts: Within a year of tenant's moving into an apartment in landlord's building, her child developed lead poisoning from lead-based paint in the apartment. The Department of Health inspected the apartment and ordered landlord to abate the condition. When landlord didn't do so, DOH referred the matter to HPD. HPD arranged for emergency abatement work in tenant's apartment. Tenant later sued the City of New York, claiming that the work was done improperly, that the city didn't advise her to relocate during the work, that the work actually increased lead dust in the apartment, and that her child's condition got worse as a result. The city argued that tenant couldn't sue it for negligence while doing its duty and asked the court to dismiss the case. Court: The city loses. Tenant can sue the city for taking on the abatement work and then doing it in a negligent manner. There were questions of fact that required a trial.

Abrajan v. Kabasso: NYLJ, 11/12/03, p. 19, col. 1 (Sup. Ct. Kings; Knipel, J)