Landlord and Security Company Not Responsible for Attack on Visitor

A visitor to landlord's building sued landlord and its security service provider, claiming that she was assaulted while visiting tenant in his apartment. Tenant was the visitor's nephew and the visitor claimed that the attack occurred due to landlord and security guards' negligence. The court denied the visitor's request for a ruling without a trial and dismissed the case. The visitor had been attacked in tenant's apartment by tenant's girlfriend. The girlfriend injured the visitor's eye. The visitor claimed that the girlfriend had threatened her and tenant on the phone the night before the incident, and tenant advised a building security guard not to allow the girlfriend into the building. But nothing in pretrial testimony indicated that the girlfriend gained entry to the building due to a defective security system or that she was allowed in by the lobby security guard, who had no ability to buzz visitors into the building. The girlfriend claimed that tenant buzzed her into the building through the intercom and that she entered the apartment when tenant opened the door. There was no indication of a history of criminal activity at the building. The building had an intercom system, locking doors, and security guards to monitor the building. Landlord therefore fulfilled its common law duty to provide minimal security precautions at the building. There also was no proof that security precautions at the front entrance were deficient in any way. The visitor wasn't an intended third-party beneficiary of the service agreement between landlord and its security company.  

Cullen v. Henry Phipps Plaza E., Linc.: Index No. 1158589/2014, 2021 NY Slip Op 30003(U)(Sup. Ct. NY; 1/4/21; Cohen, J)