Cottone v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 05 July 1994 |
| Citation | 614 N.Y.S.2d 44,206 A.D.2d 345 |
| Parties | Angelo COTTONE, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Lysaght, Lysaght & Kramer, P.C., Lake Success (Joseph L. Decolator, of counsel), for appellant.
Paul A. Crotty, Corp. Counsel, New York City (Pamela Seider Dolgow and Linda H. Young, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and LAWRENCE, JOY and GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), entered September 17, 1992, which, upon the granting of the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint at the close of the plaintiff's case for failure to establish a prima facie case, dismissed the complaint.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff, who was a police officer at the time of the accident, was injured when he tripped and fell on a defective sidewalk as he was in pursuit of a youth who had just thrown stones at and injured a young girl. At the close of the plaintiff's case, the court dismissed the complaint on the ground, inter alia, that the plaintiff's common-law negligence action is barred by the so-called "fireman's rule" (see, Santangelo v. State, 71 N.Y.2d 393, 526 N.Y.S.2d 812, 521 N.E.2d 770).
Under the circumstances, we agree with the Supreme Court that the action is barred by the fireman's rule, since the plaintiff's injuries arose out of a particular danger which police officers are expected to assume as part of their duties, notwithstanding the fact that there was no connection between the defendant's negligence and the incident which gave rise to the plaintiff's duty (see, Cooper v. City of New York, 81 N.Y.2d 584, 590-591, 601 N.Y.S.2d 432, 619 N.E.2d 369; Ruocco v. New York City Tr. Auth., 204 A.D.2d 76, 611 N.Y.S.2d 513; Zanghi v. Niagara Frontier Transp. Commn., 203 A.D.2d 960, 611 N.Y.S.2d 407).
In light of the foregoing conclusion, we need not address the plaintiff's remaining contention.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weyant v. City of New York
...1006 (4th Dept., 1993); Morrisey v. County of Erie, 198 A.D.2d 839, 603 N.Y.S.2d 1009 (4th Dept., 1993); Cottone v. City of New York, 206 A.D.2d 345, 614 N.Y.S.2d 44 (2d Dept., 1994), NYLJ July 12, 1994, p. 30, col 4. The Court posits that these cases are distinguishable. The determinative ......
-
Beube v. English
... ... Second Department ... July 5, 1994 ... Cohen & Krassner, New York City (Mark Krassner, of counsel), for appellants ... Gurfein & Graubard, New York ... ...
-
Ciervo v. City of New York
...by the application of "Santangelo". (Corbisiero v. City of New York, N.Y.L.J. 8/25/95, p. 30, col. 3.) In Cottone v. City of New York, 206 A.D.2d 345, 614 N.Y.S.2d 44, an action by a police officer injured when he tripped and fell on a defective sidewalk as he was in pursuit of a youth, was......
-
Goode v. United Artists Eastern Theatre Corp.
...Smith v. County of Erie, 210 A.D.2d 933, 621 N.Y.S.2d 1018; Hoey v. Kuchler, 208 A.D.2d 805, 619 N.Y.S.2d 50; Cottone v. City of New York, 206 A.D.2d 345, 614 N.Y.S.2d 44). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the plaintiffs' ...