Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion of Jericho Water District for summary judgment is granted, and the actions against the remaining defendants are severed.
The defendant Jericho Water District (hereinafter Jericho) cannot be held liable for the damages incurred by the plaintiffs as the result of a fire. While the plaintiffs maintain that the fire spread rapidly because the hydrant nearest to the fire was inoperable, Jericho, acting as a public entity, had no duty to keep its water system in proper repair for firefighting purposes unless a special relationship existed between it and the plaintiffs (see, Steitz v City of Beacon, 295 N.Y. 51; Moch Co. v Rensselaer Water Co., 247 N.Y. 160; Blancovitch v City of New York, 131 A.D.2d 418). The record clearly demonstrated that Jericho had no contact with the plaintiffs, and accordingly no special relationship existed (see, Kogel Lbr. Supply v Suffolk County Water Auth., 131 A.D.2d 728). Lawrence, J.P., Kunzeman, Rubin and Kooper, JJ., concur.