Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Citation
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Parent Document
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2006-08-24
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6307489/poyck-v-bryant/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (31)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
- Poyck v. Bryant, 13 Misc. 3d 699 (2006)
Full Text
1,422 charsThe gravamen of plaintiffs motion is that he cannot be held liable for the actions of third parties beyond his control such as the neighbors in unit 5-C. This argument is misplaced as the Court of Appeals, since 1979, has clearly stated that the acts of third parties are within the scope of a landlord’s responsibility pursuant to Real Property Law § 235-b. (Park W. Mgt. Corp., 47 NY2d at 326.) The courts have continuously held that the implied warranty of habitability can apply to conditions beyond a landlord’s control. (Elkman v Southgate Owners Corp., 233 AD2d 104 [1st Dept 1996] [an alleged noxious odor emanating from a retail fish store in an adjacent building neither owned nor controlled by the landlord cooperative corporation may be a breach of the implied warranty of habitability]; Sargent Realty Corp. v Vizzini, 101 Misc 2d 763 [Civ Ct, NY County 1979] [floods caused by upstairs tenant on four occasions which landlord allowed to persist resulted in substantial abatement]; Quasha v Third Colony Corp., NYLJ, Oct. 10, 1990, at 22, col 2 [Sup Ct, NY County] [noise emanating from neighbor stated a claim for breach of implied warranty of habitability]; Solomon v Brandy, NYLJ, Sept. 7, 1994, at 22, col 6 [Civ Ct, Bronx County] [evicted neighboring tenant who caused nuisance resulting in lack of water supply to tenant did not constitute a good faith defense to the implied warranty of habitability].)