Did not repair the common elements said to be the source of water infiltration that damaged a unit.

No tribunal ever decided this.

Safe Haven Properties LLC v. Madison Green Condominium · 183 AD3d 460 (1st Dept 2020) · Sup Ct NY County · Index 150242/2017

No court has decided whether this conduct occurred. This decision resolved a procedural question. Nothing here is a finding that anyone did anything.

Outcome

Split decision

Filed

2017-01-09

Last decision

2020-05-14

Elapsed

3.3 yrs

Brought by

unit owner

Posture

summary judgment

What the court held

A unit owner suing an unincorporated condominium properly names its president as a party in a representative capacity (CPLR 1025; General Associations Law s 13; Martin v Curran); the business judgment rule does NOT shield that officer, because she was named only representatively and her personal assets are not exposed. On the merits, where the by-laws make the owner responsible for the interior of the unit and give the board of managers the power to decide maintenance and repairs to the common elements, the owner must prove that the damage was the natural and proximate result of the board's failure to perform, and must do so with expert proof — the ultimate source of water infiltration "requires professional expertise."

“Plaintiffs submitted no expert opinion as to the ultimate source of the water infiltration, the determination of which requires professional expertise”
2020 NY Slip Op 02879 at *1

Outcome in full

Split. The owners WON the party question: summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the board president was reversed and that motion denied, because she was properly named in a representative capacity and the business judgment rule did not apply to her in that posture. The owners LOST the liability question: denial of their own summary judgment motion was affirmed — they failed to establish prima facie that the damage resulted from the board's failure to repair, and the court providently declined to consider unauthenticated hearsay reports and the late foundation supplied on reply. No liability was determined either way.

The harm continued while the case ran

Water damage to the unit interior, with the source of the infiltration never determined by any tribunal. Three years and four months from filing to the appellate decision, and the decision resolved who could be sued and who bore which burden — not whether the building leaks.

What it cost

Not disclosed. No decision in this case states a figure, and we publish no estimate. Why costs are mostly blank.

What would have prevented this

The evidentiary burden is the barrier, and it is a private one. To show that a board failed to repair a common element an owner must hire an engineer, because no public body will inspect and attribute the condition. DOB and HPD cite the BUILDING for a violation; neither will determine whether the board decided not to fix it, and neither produces a report the owner can use. Florida's post-Surfside structural integrity reserve study regime at least forces periodic third-party assessment of the common elements onto the record before the water reaches a unit.

Sources

Read in full and verified 2026-08-04.

← Back to Failure to Repair Common Elements