Opinion
November, 1924.
Order modified by striking out the second separate defense, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. The exemption clause relied on in said defense does not expressly exempt the defendant Rose from liability for damages to his lessee if it be shown that such damage resulted from the negligence of said defendant, and no such exemption may be implied. ( Lewis Co. v. Metropolitan Realty Co., 112 App. Div. 385, 387.) Kelly, P.J., Rich, Kelby, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.