Chapman v. Silber

In Chapman v. Silber, 97 NY2d 9, 760 N.E.2d 329, 734 N.Y.S.2d 541 (2001) the court concluded that while there was no statutory duties imposed upon the landlord in that case, liability was nevertheless governed by common law principles of negligence. Id. The Court held that summary judgment was not warranted since the evidence demonstrated that the landlord was aware that lead hazard existed within the plaintiffs' apartment. Chapman, supra. The court defined hazard in that case as knowledge that the building was old, that the paint within the same was chipping, the dangers of lead paint to children, and that said apartment housed young children. Id. The Court of Appeals held that, to survive a landlord's summary judgment motion, a tenant must be able to come forth with some evidence that the landlord knew or should have known of the hazardous condition that caused the alleged injury. In Chapman, the plaintiff was injured from lead paint, and the court surmised that, because of the age of the building, it was reasonable to believe that the landlord should have been aware, from general knowledge, of the potential lead paint poisoning problem.