Kochanski v. City of N.Y.
| Decision Date | 28 September 2010 |
| Parties | Nanette KOCHANSKI, etc., respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., appellants-respondents, et al., defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
76 A.D.3d 1050
Nanette KOCHANSKI, etc., respondent,
v.
CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., appellants-respondents, et al., defendants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Sept. 28, 2010.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Stephen J. McGrath and Victoria Scalzo of counsel), for appellant-respondent City of New York.
Conway, Farrell, Curtin & Kelly, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Jonathan T. Uejio of counsel), for appellant-respondent St. Vincent's Services, Inc.
Tracy & Stilwell, P.C., Staten Island, N.Y. (Rodney Stilwell of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., STEVEN W. FISHER, ANITA R. FLORIO, and LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, the defendants City of New York and St. Vincent's Services, Inc., separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Aliotta, J.), dated March 20, 2009, which denied their respective motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against each of them.
ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof denying the motion of the defendant City of New York for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it and substituting therefor a provision granting the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the defendant City of New York payable by the plaintiff, and one bill of costs to the plaintiff payable by the defendant St. Vincent's Services, Inc.
In 1996, pursuant to a contract with the defendant City of New York, the defendant St. Vincent's Services, Inc. (hereinafter SVS), operated a group home on Roe Street in Staten Island for youths in need of foster care. On January 22, 1996, three teenaged residents of the group home broke into the nearby home of the plaintiff's decedent and beat and stabbed him to death. The three youths were subsequently convicted of murder in the second degree in connection with the decedent's death. The plaintiff, as limited administratrix of the decedent's estate, commenced this action against, among others, the City and SVS, alleging that the defendants breached a duty to the decedent by placing the three youths in the group home despite knowing of their vicious propensities. After extensive discovery, the City and SVS separately moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted
In support of its motion, SVS submitted evidence demonstrating that there was a triable issue of fact as to its knowledge of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Heeran v. Long Island Power Auth.
...698 N.Y.S.2d 601, 720 N.E.2d 878 ; Granata v. City of White Plains, 120 A.D.3d 1187, 1188, 993 N.Y.S.2d 47 ; Kochanski v. City of New York, 76 A.D.3d 1050, 1051, 908 N.Y.S.2d 260 ). Governmental entities acting in furtherance of a proprietary function will be subject to liability under ordi......
-
Bouchard v. State
...§ 9 [1]; see Matter of Karedes v. Colella, 100 N.Y.2d at 50–51, 760 N.Y.S.2d 84, 790 N.E.2d 257 ; compare Kochanski v. City of New York, 76 A.D.3d 1050, 1052, 908 N.Y.S.2d 260 [2010] ). In light of our determination, defendant's remaining contentions pertaining to the existence of a special......
-
Fernandez v. State
...analysis of governmental immunity is whether the actions in question were proprietary or governmental in nature (Kochanski v. City of New York, 76 A.D.3d 1050, 1051 [2010] ). As a general proposition, public entities are ordinarily immune from tort claims arising out of the performance of t......
-
Phelan v. Torres
...best executed by government and is undertaken [by the government] without thought of profit or revenue.” Kochanski v. City of New York, 76 A.D.3d 1050, 908 N.Y.S.2d 260, 262–63 (2010).6 These authorities provide persuasive support, under the Supreme Court's current jurisprudence, for the co......
-
Overruling by implication and the consequent burden upon bench and bar.
...to show that defendant owed a special duty to her apart from any it owed to the public in general."); Kochanski v. City of New York, 76 A.D.3d 1050, 1050, 1052, 908 N.Y.S.2d 260, 261-63 (App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010) (holding where defendant operated a group home for youths in need of foster car......