Congratulations to Steven B. Prystowsky and Harry Steinberg on winning a Court of Appeals ruling that a residential landlord has no duty to provide radiator covers and cannot be held liable for not doing so even where the apartment tenants had requested such covers. Aaron Rivera, the child of the tenants, was injured when he climbed onto an uncovered radiator in his parents' bedroom where he was playing, unsupervised. Aaron, by his parents, sued the landlord claiming it breached its duty to maintain the premises in a safe condition. The Court of Appeals rejected both plaintiff's common-law and statutory arguments. First, the Court of Appeals held that plaintiff could not state a common-law negligence claim because the radiator was not defective and no duty was imposed by Multiple Dwelling Law Section 78 which requires that premises be maintained in safe condition. Second, the Court of Appeals rejected plaintiff's claim that Administrative Code Section 27-809, which requires pipes and risers to be insulated, applied. The court held that a radiator was not a pipe or a riser and that a radiator cover was not insulation. The court also held that while people might not be on notice that a pipe was hot, they are on notice that radiators are hot so the rationale that requires pipes to be insulated did not apply to radiators.

Aaron Rivera v. Nelson Realty, LLC, ___ N.Y.3d___, ___ N.Y.S.2d___, 2006 WL 3007018 2006).