With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Scurti v. City of New York, 40 N.Y.2d 433, 437, 354 N.E.2d 794, 795, 387 N.Y.S.2d 55, 56 (1976). But that duty of care extends only to reasonably foreseeable accidents. See Basso, 40 N.Y.2d at 241-42, 352 N.E.2d at 872-73, 386 N.Y.S.2d at 568. In the specific context of a building undergoing construction by independent contractors, this means that “unless the owner created the condition or had actual or constructive notice of the condition for such a period of time that, in the exercise of reasonable care, the owner should have corrected it,” the owner owes no duty of care with respect to “defective eondition[s].” Richardson v. Simone, 275 A.D.2d 576, 576, 712 N.Y.S.2d 672, 674 (3d Dep’t 2000); see also Goodman v. 78 W. 47th St. Corp., 253 A.D.2d 384, 677 N.Y.S.2d 116 (1st Dep’t 1998) (<HOLDING>). The only exceptions to this general absence

A: holding a landlord liable for injuries sustained by a tenant who slipped on an icy sidewalk
B: holding that petitioners allegation that it is the owner of adjoining property does not satisfy the pleading requirement
C: holding that the independent contractor exception in the ftca would not insulate the government from the contractors negligence if the duty was nondelegable under florida law
D: holding that the owner of property who retained an independent contractor did not owe any nondelegable duty of care to the plaintiff who had slipped and fallen on the adjoining sidewalk
D.