Zaritsky v. Thrifty 381 Stores, Inc. — 67 Misc. 2d 148

Majority

p. 148

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

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

June 7, 1971.

p. 149

Milton Davidoff for appellants. Rupert Holland for respondents.

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.

Cases cited

Equitable Paper Bag Co. v. Long Island Railroad 172 Misc. 934 N.Y. App. Term 1939-11-01 p. 149