Opinion
May 13, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lisa, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs, the defendants' respective motions for summary judgment are granted, and the complaint and all cross claims against them are dismissed.
In July of 1989 the plaintiff's decedent, Dimitrious Boutsiaris, attended an outdoor festival operated by the defendant Pan-Cyprian Athletic Association, Inc., on premises owned by the defendant Bohemian Citizens Benevolent Society of Astoria, Inc. The property in question was surrounded on three sides by a stone wall approximately 8 to 10 feet high, and adjoined on one of those sides by a schoolyard. Boutsiaris was sitting at a picnic table in an area where some children were playing when some type of firework was propelled from behind the nearby stone wall adjacent to the schoolyard and landed a few feet from him. Boutsiaris picked up the firework in order to throw it away and the device exploded in his hand, ultimately resulting in the loss of the hand.
Boutsiaris subsequently brought this action, alleging that the defendants breached their duty to provide adequate security measures. Upon the defendants' separate motions for summary judgment, the Supreme Court concluded that a triable issue of fact existed as to whether the defendants breached their duty to protect the festival patrons from the reasonably foreseeable criminal acts of third parties.
We conclude that the defendants are entitled to summary judgment. Although a possessor of real property is under a duty to maintain minimal security measures to protect those lawfully on the premises from reasonably foreseeable criminal acts of third parties, a possessor of land is not an insurer of a visitor's safety ( see, Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 N.Y.2d 507, 519; Eleby v. New York City Hous. Auth., 223 A.D.2d 665). A party cannot be held liable for the extraordinary and unforeseeable acts of a third party ( see, Santiago v. New York City Hous. Auth., 63 N.Y.2d 761). Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that the events which led to Boutsiaris's tragic injuries were extraordinary and unforeseeable as a matter of law, such that the defendants cannot be held liable ( see, Santiago v. New York City Hous. Auth., supra; Tarter v Schildkraut, 151 A.D.2d 414, 416). Balletta, J.P., Sullivan, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.