Opinion
December 29, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry Crispino, J.).
An issue of fact exists as to whether the crime committed against plaintiff was foreseeable, raised by evidence of criminal activity on the roof, including vandalism and rampant drug use, during the long period of time that the alarm lock on the door to the roof was broken ( see, Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 N.Y.2d 507, 518-520; Jacqueline S. v. City of New York, 81 N.Y.2d 288, 294-295). If it is found that the attack on plaintiff was foreseeable, it would follow, as a matter of law, that defendant breached its duty to plaintiff to provide reasonable security, the record establishing that defendant had ample notice that the alarm was broken, and there being no evidence that it took any other security measures with respect to the roof. Concerning causation, issues of fact exist as to whether the attack took place on the roof, and whether the failure of the alarm lock to operate was a substantial factor in contributing to the attack ( see, Gibbs v. Diamond, 256 A.D.2d 266 [decided herewith]).
Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.