Krafchuk v. State
| Decision Date | 14 May 1998 |
| Citation | 672 N.Y.S.2d 962,250 A.D.2d 962 |
| Parties | , 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 4575 John D. KRAFCHUK et al., as Guardians of the Persons and Property of Robert Krafchuk et al., Appellants, v. STATE of New York et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Simonson, Hess & Leibowitz (Alan B. Leibowitz, of counsel), New York City, and Breakstone Law Firm P.C., Bellmore, for appellants.
Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney General (Michael S. Buskus, of counsel), Albany, for respondents.
Before MIKOLL, J.P., and MERCURE, YESAWICH and PETERS, JJ.
MIKOLL, Justice Presiding.
Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (McNamara, J.), entered December 17, 1996, upon a decision of the court following a bifurcated trial in favor of the State on the issue of liability.
The accident giving rise to this claim occurred on the afternoon of February 17, 1991 in or about the Town of New Paltz, Ulster County, as Kathleen Krafchuk was traveling southbound on Interstate Route 87 with her spouse, Robert Krafchuk, who was asleep in the passenger seat. At some point prior to the accident, Kathleen Krafchuk fell asleep at the wheel and, as the Krafchuk vehicle approached mile marker 78.05, it exited the travel portion of the roadway, striking the flared, anchored end of a guide rail with the right front tire. The Krafchuk vehicle then rode the guide rail for some distance before continuing over the guide rail and across a grassy area, eventually striking a tree. As a result of the collision, the Krafchuks' vehicle was destroyed and they allegedly sustained serious injuries.
Claimants, as guardians of the Krafchuks, thereafter filed a claim (twice amended) against the State and the State Thruway Authority (hereinafter collectively referred to as the State) alleging, inter alia, that the portion of Route 87 encompassing the accident site was negligently designed and constructed, particularly with respect to the placement of the aforementioned guide rail. The State answered and counterclaimed for contribution. Following a bifurcated trial, at which testimony was received from various expert witnesses, the Court of Claims dismissed the claim, concluding that there was no basis for imposing liability upon the State. This appeal by claimants ensued.
The crux of the parties' dispute at trial centered upon the placement of the guide rail. As originally constructed in 1953, the portion of Route 87 encompassing the accident site consisted of two southbound lanes, the most westerly of which was abutted by a paved shoulder. Beyond the paved shoulder was an embankment with a one-on-two slope, meaning that for every two feet traveled horizontally (west) there was a one-foot vertical drop. The record reveals that this embankment extended for quite some distance both north and south of mile marker 78.05 and was protected by a guide rail.
In or about 1982, a safety improvement project, referred to by the parties as the "Callanan job", made significant changes to the area beyond the paved shoulder in the vicinity of mile marker 78.05. Specifically, using material excavated from another...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kinge v. State
...1113, 1115, 883 N.Y.S.2d 639 [2009]; Conolly v. Thuillez, 58 A.D.3d 973, 974, 871 N.Y.S.2d 476 [2009]; Krafchuk v. State of New York, 250 A.D.2d 962, 964, 672 N.Y.S.2d 962 [1998] ). Thus, the Court of Claims' conclusion that probable cause did not exist to prosecute claimant for the crimes ......
-
Winkler v. Kingston Housing Authority
...of the evidence and the inferences to be drawn therefrom and grant the judgment we deem appropriate (see, Krafchuk v. State of New York, 250 A.D.2d 962, 963-965, 672 N.Y.S.2d 962, 964; Walsh v. State of New York, 232 A.D.2d 939, 940, 648 N.Y.S.2d 816; see also, Diaz v. State of New York, --......
-
Richmor Aviation, Inc. v. Sportsflight Air, Inc.
...1135, 1137, 877 N.Y.S.2d 488 [2009]; Conolly v. Thuillez, 58 A.D.3d 973, 974, 871 N.Y.S.2d 476 [2009]; Krafchuk v. State of New York, 250 A.D.2d 962, 964, 672 N.Y.S.2d 962 [1998] ). Defendant's various claims of evidentiary errors by Supreme Court require little discussion. None of Supreme ......
-
Jump v. Jump
...Auth., 259 A.D.2d 819, 823, 686 N.Y.S.2d 513; Diaz v. State of New York, 256 A.D.2d 1010, 682 N.Y.S.2d 294; Krafchuk v. State of New York, 250 A.D.2d 962, 964, 672 N.Y.S.2d 962). Notably, where, as here, the issue concerns whether the parties have entered into an oral agreement, "the court ......