Rella v. State
| Decision Date | 03 February 1986 |
| Citation | 498 N.Y.S.2d 63,117 A.D.2d 591 |
| Parties | Maria RELLA, Appellant, v. The STATE of New York, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Milton Bensky, Montrose (John J. Sherlock, of counsel), for appellant.
Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen., Albany (Peter D. Dooley and Betsy Broder, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and THOMPSON, RUBIN and KUNZEMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a claim for damages for personal injuries, claimant appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims (McCabe, J.), dated August 10, 1984, which, after a trial on the issue of liability only, dismissed the claim.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Claimant was injured when she was struck on the head from behind while visiting her son who was a patient at the Harlem Valley Psychiatric Center. Claimant neither saw nor heard her attacker, and the event was not witnessed by anyone else. Investigators from the institution and the State Police failed to identify the assailant.
Claimant offered into evidence proof that a geriatric patient, known to be assaultive in the past, was absent from his building immediately after the incident. There was no other evidence linking that patient to the attack and no evidence at all concerning the supervision of that or any other hospital patient.
The Court of Claims correctly determined that claimant failed to sustain her burden of proving defendant's negligence. While it was possible that the attack resulted from defendant's negligent supervision of a hospital patient, no such negligence was shown nor was claimant able to prove the identity of her assailant. Moreover, there were many possible explanations for the occurrence which would be consistent with a finding of due care on defendant's part. In such circumstances, claimant has failed to prove that the negligence of defendant caused the injury (see, Ingersoll v. Liberty Bank of Buffalo, 278 N.Y. 1, 14 N.E.2d 828). Negligence cannot be presumed from the mere occurrence of an injury and the State is not required in every case to monitor its patients' activities 24 hours per day (see, Mochen v. State of New York, 57 A.D.2d 719, 396 N.Y.S.2d 113).
It was not error for the Court of Claims to quash the subpoena directed to the Executive Director of the psychiatric center. Her affidavit clearly showed that she had no personal knowledge of the incident, having derived all of her information from the investigator, who did testify at the trial. Since it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vega-Santana v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp.
...the escalator is not evidence that the condition that caused the accident is itself dangerous. See, e.g., Rella v. State of N.Y., 117 A.D.2d 591, 592, 498 N.Y.S.2d 63 (2d Dep't 1986) (“Negligence cannot be presumed from the mere occurrence of an injury.”); Kaplan v. City of N.Y., 10 A.D.2d ......
-
Ward v. Forrester Day Care, Inc.
...280 (Iowa 1975) (personal injuries sustained by a ninth grade physical education student while playing a game); Rella v. State, 117 A.D.2d 591, 498 N.Y.S.2d 63 (1986) (State not liable for an injury to claimant who was visiting a patient at a psychiatric center, even though there was eviden......
-
Glover v. Jack In Teh Box Inc
...injury." J.E. v. Beth Isr. Hosp.. 295 A.D.2d 281, 284, 744 N.Y.S.2d 166, 170 (1st Dep't 2002) (citing Rella v State of New York. 117 AD2d 591, 592, 498 N.Y.S.2d 63, 64 [2nd Dep't 1986]). Plaintiff demonstrates no further proof of a possible defect in the tray. Furthermore, Plaintiff fails t......
- Puccini v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Inc.