Bono v. State
| Citation | 154 N.Y.S.2d 643,136 N.E.2d 715,1 N.Y.2d 885 |
| Parties | , 136 N.E.2d 715 Joseph BONO et al., Appellants, v. STATE of New York, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 11 July 1956 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
Joe Schapiro, Hamilton, for appellants.
Jacob K. Javits, Atty. Gen. (Joseph H. Murphy, Syracuse, and James O. Moore, Jr., Albany, of counsel), for respondent.
The judgment appealed from insofar as it applies to the claim of Joseph Bono for property damage to his automobile should be modified by reinstating the judgment of the Court of Claims which awarded him the sum of $1,800 for such loss, and the judgment, insofar as it dismissed the claim of Ann Bono for personal injuries and that of Joseph Bono for his wife's medical expenses and for loss of her services, should be affirmed, without costs.
We conclude from the record that the fair preponderance of the credible evidence favors the findings of the Court of Claims to the effect that the State negligently failed in its duty safely to maintain highway Route 20 at the scene of the accident when it persistently cast the snow plowed from the highway in and upon the drainage ditches at a time when it knew or should have known from past experience that the traveled portion of the highway would be deeply flooded in the event of a thaw.
The affirmed findings of contributory negligence which defeat the remainder of the claim are supported by some evidence.
Judgment of the Appellate Division modified, insofar as it dismisses the claim of Joseph Bono for property damage, by reinstating the judgment of the Court of Claims with respect thereto and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.
Judgment accordingly.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nelson v. State
......State of New York, 169 Misc. 372, 7 N.Y.S.2d 621, affd. 256 App.Div. 798, 12 N.Y.S.2d 640, affd. 281 N.Y. 737, 23 N.E.2d 550.) . In the present case there is no doubt that the standing water constituted an unreasonably dangerous condition. (See Bono v. State of New York, 1 N.Y.2d 885, 154 N.Y.S.2d 643, 136 N.E.2d 715; Torrey v. State of New York, 266 App.Div. 900, 42 N.Y.S.2d 567, revg. 175 Misc. 259, 23 N.Y.S.2d 370; see generally, Anno. 61 A.L.R.2d 425.) The next question, then, is whether the State knew or should have known of this ......
-
Timcoe v. State
......State of New York, supra; Freund v. State of New York, supra, at 909, 524 N.Y.S.2d 575; Rooney v. State of New York, 111 A.D.2d 159, 488 N.Y.S.2d 468; Kelly v. Town of Islip, 141 A.D.2d 611, 529 N.Y.S.2d 530; cf., Bono v. State of New York, 1 N.Y.2d 885, 154 N.Y.S.2d 643, 136 N.E.2d 715). The defendant's remaining contention is ......
-
Kelly v. Town of Islip
...... However, our courts have held that standing water on a highway may constitute an unreasonably dangerous condition ( see, Nelson v. State of New York, 105 Misc.2d 107, 111, 431 N.Y.S.2d 955; Bono v. State of New York, 1 N.Y.2d 885, 154 N.Y.S.2d 643, 136 N.E.2d 715). Although lack of ......
-
Fiege v. State
......State of New York, supra, 137 A.D.2d at 909, 524 N.Y.S.2d 575; Rooney v. State of New York, 111 A.D.2d 159, 488 N.Y.S.2d 468; Kelly v. Town of Islip, 141 A.D.2d 611, 529 N.Y.S.2d 530; Bono v. State of ......