In Collegetown of Ithaca v. Freidman, 110 AD2d 955, 487 NYS2d 881, the municipality ordered repairs of the building under the terms of the lease, the tenant was responsible to comply with all statutes, ordinances, rules, orders, regulations, and requirements of the local government and their departments. The court held that in spite of the foregoing language, an issue of fact existed on whether tenant or the landlord was responsible for the repairs depending on whether the repairs were structural. If the repairs were structural, then landlord would be responsible. The court in Collegtown said: "[4,5] Generally, absent a covenant by the landlord to repair, a landlord has no duty to make repairs (see Howell v. Gagliano, 52 A.D.2d 1040, 384 N.Y.S.2d 576), including repairs ordered by a municipality (see Gould v. Springer, 206 N.Y. 641, 99 N.E. 149). However, in other cases such as this, where there existed general covenants by the tenant to repair and to comply with laws, it has been held that the landlord was liable to make repairs ordered by a municipality where such repairs were substantial and structural as opposed to ordinary or incidental (see Second United Cities Realty Corp. v. Price & Schumaker Co., 242 N.Y. 120, 151 N.E. 150; Herald Square Realty Co. v. Saks & Co., 215 N.Y. 427, 109 N.E. 545; Bush Term. Assoc. v. Federated Dept. Stores; 73 A.D.2d 943, 424 N.Y.S.2d 28; Mayfair Mdse. Co. v. Wayne, 2nd Cir., 415 F.2d 23; see generally Annot., 22 A.L.R.3d 521, 7[a]; 10[a]). Whether a landlord in a particular case is required to make repairs ordered by a municipality depends on the language of the lease, as well as circumstances surrounding its creation. Thus, summary judgment was properly denied on the issue.