88 N.Y.2d 449 (1996)

Municipal Home Rule Law § 11(1)(j) does not prohibit a city from enacting a local law that transfers liability for sidewalk maintenance from the city to the abutting property owners.

Summary

Mary Hausser sued Salvatore Giunta to recover damages for injuries sustained when she tripped on a defective sidewalk abutting Giunta’s property. The City of Long Beach had a local ordinance making landowners liable for injuries caused by defects in abutting sidewalks. Giunta moved for summary judgment, arguing that Municipal Home Rule Law § 11(1)(j) invalidated the city ordinance. The Supreme Court granted the motion, and the Appellate Division affirmed. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, holding that § 11(1)(j) only prohibits local laws that *supersede* a state statute, and the Long Beach ordinance did not do so. Therefore, the ordinance was valid, and Giunta could be held liable.

Facts

Mary and Henry Hausser lived next door to Salvatore Giunta in the City of Long Beach. A city sidewalk abutted both properties. In 1989, Mary Hausser tripped and sustained serious injuries on a broken section of the sidewalk abutting Giunta’s property. The Hausser’s commenced a personal injury action against Giunta. Appellants claimed that they offered to repair the sidewalk prior to the incident but respondent declined the offer. Respondent denied that appellants ever offered to repair the sidewalk.

Procedural History

The Supreme Court granted Giunta’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint. The Appellate Division affirmed. The New York Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal and reversed the Appellate Division’s order.

Issue(s)

Whether Municipal Home Rule Law § 11(1)(j) renders invalid section 256 of the City of Long Beach Code, which makes a landowner with property abutting city sidewalks liable for injuries caused by defects in the sidewalk.

Holding

No, because section 11(1)(j) of the Municipal Home Rule Law plainly restricts the adoption of local laws which would supersede State statute, and section 256 of the Long Beach City Code does not supersede a State statute.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals analyzed Municipal Home Rule Law § 11(1)(j), which states that a local law is invalid if it “supersedes a state statute” by transferring liability to abutting property owners for sidewalk maintenance. The Court emphasized that the Long Beach City Code § 256 did not supersede any *state* statute. The Court distinguished its holding from the Appellate Division’s decision in Rooney v. City of Long Beach, which incorrectly interpreted Municipal Home Rule Law § 11(1)(j) as invalidating local laws that transfer liability regardless of whether they supersede a state statute. The Court of Appeals stated, “Section 11 of the Municipal Home Rule Law plainly restricts the adoption of local laws which would supersede State statute. On its face, section 11 (1) (j) does not expressly prohibit localities from enacting statutes which transfer liability to property owners for injuries caused by defective sidewalks unless a contrary State statute exists.” The court noted that liability for sidewalk defects generally falls on the municipality, not the abutting landowner (City of Rochester v. Campbell, 123 NY 405). However, this rule has exceptions, including when a local ordinance specifically imposes a duty on the landowner (Willis v. Parker, 225 NY 159). Since Long Beach had a valid ordinance, and since no state statute was being superseded, the court found the landowner could be liable. The Court reversed the lower court ruling, reinstating the claim against Giunta.