Legal Opinion

Martinez v. Lazaroff

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 20, 1979PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

*820We agree that, as a matter of law, the failure of defendants to supply their tenants with hot water was not the proximate or legal cause of the injuries suffered by the infant plaintiff (Rivera v City of New York, 11 NY2d 856; cf. Pagan v Goldberger, 51 AD2d 508; see Prosser, Torts [4th ed], § 42, p 244). In this instance it was not the failure to supply hot water which was the direct cause of the injuries; the causal connection between the two was attenuated. The failure to furnish hot water…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rivera v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
  2. Pagan v. GoldbergerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. Derdiarian v. Felix Contracting Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Kush v. City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Hain v. JamisonNew York Court of Appeals · 2016
  4. Mack v. Altmans Stage Lighting Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  5. Johnson v. Johnson Chemical Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API