Opinion
2020–03585 Index No. 603412/18
11-23-2022
Kevin DACRUZ, respondent, v. AIRWAY CLEANERS, LLC, appellant, et al., defendant.
Brown Gavalas & Fromm LLP, New York, NY (Timothy G. Hourican of counsel), for appellant. Ancona & Levine (Thomas Torto, New York, NY, of counsel), for respondent.
Brown Gavalas & Fromm LLP, New York, NY (Timothy G. Hourican of counsel), for appellant.
Ancona & Levine (Thomas Torto, New York, NY, of counsel), for respondent.
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P., LINDA CHRISTOPHER, PAUL WOOTEN, LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Airway Cleaners, LLC, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Diccia T. Pineda–Kirwan, J.), entered March 16, 2020. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Airway Cleaners, LLC.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Airway Cleaners, LLC, is granted.
On July 8, 2015, the plaintiff, an employee of nonparty American Airlines, allegedly was injured when he slipped and fell on liquid on the floor of a bathroom owned by American Airlines and located in John F. Kennedy International Airport. The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant Airway Cleaners, LLC, which had a janitorial service agreement with American Airlines, and the defendant Airway Maintenance, LLC. The defendants moved, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against Airway Cleaners, LLC. In an order entered March 16, 2020, the Supreme Court, among other things, denied that branch of the motion. Airway Cleaners, LLC, appeals.
"Generally, a contractual obligation, standing alone, will not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party" ( Cortes v. City of New York, 188 A.D.3d 643, 644, 135 N.Y.S.3d 119 ; see Espinal v. Melville Snow Contrs., 98 N.Y.2d 136, 140, 746 N.Y.S.2d 120, 773 N.E.2d 485 ; Vidal v. City of New York, 199 A.D.3d 863, 865, 157 N.Y.S.3d 519 ). However, insofar as relevant here, an exception to this general rule applies where "the contracting party has entirely displaced the other party's duty to maintain the premises safely" ( Espinal v. Melville Snow Contrs., 98 N.Y.2d at 140, 746 N.Y.S.2d 120, 773 N.E.2d 485 ).
Here, the defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against Airway Cleaners, LLC, by demonstrating that a limited janitorial service agreement between Airway Cleaners, LLC, and American Airlines was not a comprehensive and exclusive agreement which entirely displaced American Airlines’ duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition (see Burger v. Brickman Group Ltd., LLC, 174 A.D.3d 568, 569–570, 104 N.Y.S.3d 189 ; Foster v. Herbert Slepoy Corp., 76 A.D.3d 210, 905 N.Y.S.2d 226 ; Yousefi v. Rudeth Realty, LLC, 61 A.D.3d 677, 678, 877 N.Y.S.2d 132 ). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
The parties’ remaining contentions need not be reached in light of our determination.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against Airway Cleaners, LLC.
CONNOLLY, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, WOOTEN and WAN, JJ., concur.