Jansen v. State

Decision Date17 April 1968
Docket Number43797,Nos. 43793,s. 43793
Citation60 Misc.2d 36,301 N.Y.S.2d 811
PartiesAngela I. JANSEN, Claimant, v. The STATE of New York, Defendant. Gunter JANSEN, Claimant, v. The STATE of New York, Defendant. Claim
CourtNew York Court of Claims

Bond, Schoeneck & King, by John F. Rafferty, and Francis E. Maloney, Jr., Syracuse, of counsel, for claimant.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen., by Gordon H. Mahley, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., and Mackenzie, Smith, Lewis, Michell & Hughes, by William R. Roy, Syracuse, of counsel, for the State.

MEMORANDUM-DECISION

JOHN CARROLL YOUNG, Judge.

These claims, for personal injuries sustained by Angela I. Jansen, and the derivative claim of her husband, Gunter Jansen, for loss of her services and consortium and for medical expenses, were duly filed and served on the Attorney General on May 6, 1964.

The claims are based on alleged negligence of certain members of the New York State Police as hereinafter mentioned, in the operation of State Police vehicles while in the process of apprehending a suspected criminal who was operating a 1951 Buick automobile reported to the police to have been a stolen vehicle.

The accident out of which these claims arose occurred on February 14, 1964 at about 11:55 P.M. on a state highway known as Route 11; at the point where the accident happened, northbound and southbound traffic are divided into separate lanes by a mall; the place of this accident was just north of a traffic interchange known as Northern Lights Traffic Circle in the County of Onondaga, New York. Claimant Angela I. Jansen, at the time of such accident, was the operator of a 1961 Buick Convertible automobile owned by her husband, claimant Gunter Jansen, which she had been driving northerly on said Route 11 intending to turn to her left on Bailey Road and to proceed westerly on Bailey Road toward her home; Bailey Road intersects Route 11 from the west at a point just north of where her vehicle had been brought to a stop. She had stopped in obedience to a traffic light controlling northbound traffic at this point and was in the left-hand lane of the two lanes, provided for any northbound traffic, intending to turn left into Bailey Road from said Route 11.

While her vehicle was standing in this position, which she described as approximately two feet from the left-hand curb line and with the front of her car near the northerly tip of the traffic island separating the north and southbound lanes of Route 11, a position in which she remained stopped for about thirty seconds, she testified that (from a distance of 600 or 700 feet) she observed three pairs of headlights coming toward her, side by side. Of these vehicles, it developed that the one in the center was the stolen 1951 Buick and on each side thereof was a State Police car operated by a member of the New York State Police.

As these vehicles came toward the Jansen car and approached the point where the southbound traffic is required to go to the right or westerly side of the traffic island, the stolen vehicle was turned to its left and collided with the State Police vehicle on that side; both these vehicles then turned to the left or easterly side of such traffic island, into the part of the highway reserved for northbound traffic where the Jansen car was standing and the stolen v. Vehicle collided violently with the front of the said Jansen vehicle, forced it backward for some distance, and caused claimant Angela I. Jansen to be thrown against various parts of her automobile and to receive severe and painful personal injuries; as a result of these injuries she underwent considerable pain, suffering and disability and was obliged to undergo medical treatment; as a further result claimant Gunter Jansen was deprived of her services and companionship and has become liable for the payment of her medical treatment.

The series of events which culminated in the said collision out of which these claims arose, commenced at approximately 10:45 P.M. on said evening of February 14, 1964, when Trooper James E. Maring, a member of the New York State Police, received a radio message from the New York State Police Substation located at Pulaski, New York, that a 1951 Buick automobile had been stolen. Trooper Maring proceeded to the intersection of Route 11 and Route 13 in the Village of Pulaski, where he stationed himself to watch for the stolen vehicle. Shortly thereafter, he saw the 1951 Buick being driven southbound on Route 11 by a young male operator. After comparing the registration number of this 1951 Buick with the registration number given in the police radio message, he followed the stolen vehicle and halted it in front of a restaurant on the south edge of Pulaski. Trooper Maring stopped his State Police car behind the Buick, leaving his red light on, and as Trooper Maring started to get out of his vehicle to approach the operator of the Buick, said operator again started off in a southerly direction on Route 11. Route 11 is one of the principal north-south highways through this section of the State of New York, with traffic proceeding both north and south thereon.

Trooper Maring returned to his vehicle and started south in pursuit of the Buick. At this point, Trooper Richard C. Peck of the New York State Police, was in the process of obtaining gasoline for his State Police vehicle at the Pulaski State Police Substation and observed the black 1951 Buick pass southbound on Route 11, followed immediately by the New York State Police vehicle driven by Trooper Maring.

Trooper Peck, also having received the earlier radio message concerning the theft of the 1951 Buick, took up the chase and followed Trooper Maring and the 1951 Buick south on Route 11. In the ensuing pursuit, on two occasions vehicles from the Oswego County Sheriff's Department were placed on the highway as roadblocks ahead of the 1951 Buick, but on each occasion, the operator of the stolen vehicle drove around the Sheriff's car and continued his flight to the south. In the meantime Trooper Maring, on seven or eight occasions, attempted to pass the 1951 Buick in an effort to pull ahead of it and cause it to come to a stop. On these occasions, the operator of the Buick swerved to his left or to his right, thereby preventing Trooper Maring from passing.

At another point in the pursuit, a third New York State Trooper, identified as Trooper McLaughlin, joined in the attempt to halt the stolen Buick; entering Route 11 southbound ahead of the Buick, Trooper McLaughlin thereafter slowed his car and attempted to maintain a position directly in front of the Buick and thus force it to come to a halt; this effort, likewise, was unsuccessful since the operator of the Buick struck the rear of Trooper McLaughlin's vehicle causing it to go out of control and off to the side of the highway, at which time the Buick continued on ahead of Trooper McLaughlin; the latter's car shortly thereafter skidded out of control and Trooper McLaughlin no longer continued the chase.

During the course of the pursuit, both Troopers Maring and Peck from time to time attempted to blind the operator of the Buick by focusing the stotlights of their police cars on the stolen vehicle and by directing the highbeams of their headlights on that car, but did not attempt to shoot at the tires of the fleeing vehicle.

There came a time when Trooper Maring's vehicle began to run low on fuel, and for this reason Troopers Peck and Maring caused their vehicles to exchange places so that from that point on Trooper Peck's car was immediately behind the stolen vehicle and Trooper Maring's some distance to the rear of Trooper Peck's vehicle.

The pursuit covered a distance of from 34 to 38 miles on Route 11 from Pulaski, N.Y. to the point where the accident ultimately occurred, required 35 to 40 minutes time and was conducted at speeds at times up to 90 MPH; at other times, when proceeding through populated areas or in meeting other traffic on the highway, the vehicles were operated at lower rates of speed; between Pulaski and Central Square there was a very minimum of traffic; the chase led through the Village of North Syracuse and eventually approached the vicinity of the large traffic interchange south of that village, known as Northern Lights Traffic Circle above mentioned; in this area Trooper Peck stated the amount of traffic on the highway increased.

At this point, three highways, namely Route 11, Interstate Route 81, and the South Bay Road, so-called, meet in a large traffic circle or interchange. Route 11 north of the traffic circle is a two-way highway with no mall or median dividing the north and southbound traffic, and is approximately 45 feet in width, accommodating three lanes of traffic Two southbound and one northbound; at the point where this section of Route 11 meets the traffic island above mentioned, on the approach to the north edge of the traffic circle, the two lanes of southbound traffic are channeled into a roadway about 24 feet in width accommodating two lanes of traffic along the west side of such traffic island and separated by such island from the two-lane roadway provided for northbound traffic along the east side of such traffic island. It was on the part of the roadway reserved for northbound traffic where claimant, Angela I. Jansen, had brought her vehicle to a stop for said traffic light.

About 57 feet to the north of this island, said Bailey Road intersects said Route 11 from the west and the traffic signal lights located at this intersection control...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Ast v. State
    • United States
    • New York Court of Claims
    • February 17, 1984
    ...Nelson v. City of New York, 100 Misc.2d 309, 418 N.Y.S.2d 895, affd. 75 A.D.2d 1025, 427 N.Y.S.2d 893, supra; Jansen v. State of New York, 60 Misc.2d 36, 301 N.Y.S.2d 811, affd. 32 A.D.2d 889, 302 N.Y.S.2d 1016; Jones v. County of Herkimer, 51 Misc.2d 130, 272 N.Y.S.2d 925, The question tha......
  • Zulauf v. State, s. 62853
    • United States
    • New York Court of Claims
    • May 9, 1983
    ...conduct contributed to any recklessness on the part of the pursued drivers, to which liability will not attach. (Jansen v. State of New York, 60 Misc.2d 36, 301 N.Y.S.2d 811, affd. 32 A.D.2d 889, 302 N.Y.S.2d 1016.)6 Requires motorists to obey a crossing signal that indicates the approach o......
  • Thain v. City of New York
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 6, 1970
    ...the facts of this case was a concurrent proximate cause of the accident (cf. Stanton v. State of New York, supra; Jansen v. State of New York, 60 Misc.2d 36, 301 N.Y.S.2d 811, affd. 32 A.D.2d 889, 302 N.Y.S.2d 1016; Brennan v. City of Albany, 284 App.Div. 997, 135 N.Y.S.2d This case is dist......
  • LaMotta v. City of New York
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • May 18, 1987
    ...care imposed upon officers when responding to an emergency (Vehicle & Traffic Law § 1104) is inapplicable (see, Jansen v. State of New York, 60 Misc.2d 36, 41, 301 N.Y.S.2d 811, affd. 32 A.D.2d 889, 302 N.Y.S.2d While the trial court did frequently intervene in the trial by questioning witn......
  • 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