A lawsuit against the landlord of an apartment complex where the plaintiff was sexually assaulted was reinstated by a New York appeals court. The defendant, Helio Health Inc., owns apartment buildings that provide supportive living services to help tenants recover from substance abuse and addiction.
The plaintiff, then a minor, and two of her friends, went to the apartment of one of the residents to buy and use drugs. While there, she was sexually assaulted by two residents who were participants in Helio’s supportive living program and one former resident of the building. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Helio and others alleging that Helio had a duty to supervise the conduct of the residents of its buildings, and to establish policies and procedures to prevent foreseeable harms, including child sexual abuse. NY State Supreme Court Onondaga County Justice Robert E. Antonacci II granted a motion for summary judgment by Helio, and dismissed the complaint.. The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court of the State of NY Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, which reversed Antonacci’s decision and reinstated the complaint against Helio.
The appeals court ruled that:
- Landowners owe people on their property a duty of reasonable care under the circumstances to maintain their property in a safe condition. As a corollary of that duty, landowners have the duty to protect tenants, patrons or invitees from foreseeable harm caused by the criminal conduct of others while they are on the premises,.
- Landowners are not required to protect visitors from unforeseeable injuries, but they do have a duty to control the conduct of third persons on their premises when they have the opportunity to control such persons and are reasonably aware of the need for such control.
- Residents of the supportive living program were not tenants over whom defendant had no control.
- Defendant had a legal duty to take appropriate action to protect against foreseeable harm, including a third party’s foreseeable criminal conduct,
- The defendant’s court filings raised issues of fact regarding the foreseeability of the incident that occurred, according to the decision. It is for a jury to decide whether the incident was foreseeable and, if so, whether defendant failed to take reasonable actions to prevent the foreseeable harm.
Call or text New York premises liability attorneys Friedman & Ranzenhofer, PC at (716) 543-3764 for a free case evaluation if you are injured due to your landlord’s negligence.