De Angelis v. Lutheran Medical Center

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtCOOKE
Citation58 N.Y.2d 1053,462 N.Y.S.2d 626
Parties, 449 N.E.2d 406 Barbara DE ANGELIS, Individually and as Natural Guardian of Deirdre De Angelis and Others, Infants, Appellant, v. LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. M. Philip AMODEO, as Administrator of the Estate of Yves Le Henaff, Deceased, et al., Appellants, v. Thomas N. PRECIOUS et al., Respondents.
Decision Date29 March 1983

Page 626

462 N.Y.S.2d 626
58 N.Y.2d 1053, 449 N.E.2d 406
Barbara DE ANGELIS, Individually and as Natural Guardian of
Deirdre De Angelis and Others, Infants, Appellant,
v.
LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.
M. Philip AMODEO, as Administrator of the Estate of Yves Le
Henaff, Deceased, et al., Appellants,
v.
Thomas N. PRECIOUS et al., Respondents.
Court of Appeals of New York.
March 29, 1983.

Page 627

Keith V. La Rose, Poughkeepsie, William J. Stutman, New York City, and Donald D. Brown, Jr., Poughkeepsie, for appellants.

Roger P. McTiernan, New York City, Frank E. Maher, Brooklyn, and Katherine Hargas, New York City, for Lutheran Medical Center and another, respondents.

B. Jennifer Jaffee and Steven B. Prystowsky, New York City, for Thomas N. Precious and others, respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division, 84 A.D.2d 17, 445 N.Y.S.2d 188, in each of these appeals should be affirmed, with costs.

In each case, a child seeks recovery in a derivative action for loss of consortium against an alleged tort-feasor who inflicted disabling injuries on one of the child's parents. Such actions, however real the loss incurred, were not recognized at common law and we find no reason to recognize such a right now. In particular, the existence of the right of a husband or wife, in view of the nature of the marital relation, to bring an action derived from injuries to his or her spouse, to whatever extent it may be said to be analogous, does not warrant extending this right to a child and certainly not on the equal protection grounds asserted by the appellants.

Duty is essentially a legal term by which we express our conclusion that there can be liability (see, generally, Green, The Duty Problem in Negligence Cases, 28 Col.L.Rev. 1014). It tells us whether the risk to which one person exposes another is within the protection of the law. In fixing the bounds of that duty, not only logic and science, but policy play an important role (Becker v. Schwartz, 46 N.Y.2d 401, 408, 413 N.Y.S.2d 895, 386 N.E.2d 807; Ventricelli v. Kinney System Rent A Car, 45 N.Y.2d 950, 411 N.Y.S.2d 555, 383 N.E.2d 1149; Pagan v. Goldberger, 51 A.D.2d 508, 510, 382 N.Y.S.2d 549; Ortiz v. Kinoshita & Co., 30 A.D.2d 334, 336-337, 292 N.Y.S.2d 48; Prosser, Torts [4th ed], § 42, pp. 244-249).

A line must be drawn between the competing policy considerations of providing a remedy to everyone who is injured and of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
156 practice notes
  • Stagl v. Delta Airlines, Inc., No. 423
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • April 17, 1995
    ...Servs. Corp., 83 N.Y.2d 579, 585, 611 N.Y.S.2d 817, 820, 634 N.E.2d 189, 192 (1994); see also De Angelis v. Lutheran Medical Center, 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 627-28, 449 N.E.2d 406, 407-08 (1983), we also note that New York courts do not exercise this authority on an ad hoc T......
  • Landon v. Kroll Lab. Specialists, Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • November 22, 2011
    ...“Duty is essentially a legal term by which we express our conclusion that there can be liability” ( De Angelis v. Lutheran Med. Ctr., 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 449 N.E.2d 406). Obligations that flow exclusively from a contract must be enforced as contractual duties under a the......
  • Strauss v. Belle Realty Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • December 27, 1983
    ...In fixing the bounds of that duty, not only logic and science, but policy play an important roll" (De Angelis v. Lutheran Medical Center, 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 449 N.E.2d 406; see Donohue v. Copiague Union Free School Dist., 64 A.D.2d 29, 33, 407 N.Y.S.2d 874, affd., 47 N.......
  • Charles v. Suvannavejh
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • November 17, 2009
    ...is not compensable. Devito v. Opatich, 215 A.D.2d 714, 715, 627 N.Y.S.2d 441 (2d Dep't 1995). See De Angelis v. Lutheran Med. Center, 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 449 N.E.2d 406 (1983); De'Leone v. City of New York, 45 A.D.3d 254, 255, 845 N.Y.S.2d 241 (1st Dep't 2007). Nor is lo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
156 cases
  • Stagl v. Delta Airlines, Inc., No. 423
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • April 17, 1995
    ...Servs. Corp., 83 N.Y.2d 579, 585, 611 N.Y.S.2d 817, 820, 634 N.E.2d 189, 192 (1994); see also De Angelis v. Lutheran Medical Center, 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 627-28, 449 N.E.2d 406, 407-08 (1983), we also note that New York courts do not exercise this authority on an ad hoc T......
  • Landon v. Kroll Lab. Specialists, Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • November 22, 2011
    ...“Duty is essentially a legal term by which we express our conclusion that there can be liability” ( De Angelis v. Lutheran Med. Ctr., 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 449 N.E.2d 406). Obligations that flow exclusively from a contract must be enforced as contractual duties under a the......
  • Strauss v. Belle Realty Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • December 27, 1983
    ...the bounds of that duty, not only logic and science, but policy play an important roll" (De Angelis v. Lutheran Medical Center, 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 449 N.E.2d 406; see Donohue v. Copiague Union Free School Dist., 64 A.D.2d 29, 33, 407 N.Y.S.2d 874, affd., 47 N.Y.2d ......
  • Charles v. Suvannavejh
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • November 17, 2009
    ...is not compensable. Devito v. Opatich, 215 A.D.2d 714, 715, 627 N.Y.S.2d 441 (2d Dep't 1995). See De Angelis v. Lutheran Med. Center, 58 N.Y.2d 1053, 1055, 462 N.Y.S.2d 626, 449 N.E.2d 406 (1983); De'Leone v. City of New York, 45 A.D.3d 254, 255, 845 N.Y.S.2d 241 (1st Dep't 2007). Nor is lo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT