Zaritsky v. Thrifty 381 Stores, Inc.

1971 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1562 · Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Jun 7, 1971

Full text

Joyce Zaritsky v. Thrifty 381 Stores, Inc., Appellant Rosalie L. Chuk v. Thrifty 871 Stores, Inc., Appellant Thomas Brown v. Thrifty 381 Stores, Inc., Appellant Sam Shapiro v. Thrifty 871 Stores, Inc.

Per Curiam. The owner of a cleaning store which merely collects clothing for cleaning elsewhere and contains no highly flammable material has no duty, in the absence of statute, to install a sprinkler or other fire alarm system. It was error to predicate a finding of negligence on failure to install such apparatus. Since a bailee for mutual benefit is not an insurer and no liability exists for loss of property by him as a result of fire where negligence has not been established (Hale v. Platek, 182 N. Y. S. 750; Equitable Paper Bag Co. v. Long Is. R. R. Co., 172 Misc. 934; DeOnis v. Schmeltzer, 71 N. Y. S. 2d 384) substantial justice ‘ ‘ according to the rules of substantive law ’ ’ (CCA, § 1804) requires reversal. The judgments should be reversed, without costs and complaints dismissed. Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Markowitz and Gold, JJ. Judgments reversed, etc.