From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 28, 2003
309 A.D.2d 679 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2023

October 28, 2003.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Betty Owen Stinson, J.), entered on or about June 10, 2002, which granted defendants' motion for a directed verdict at the end of plaintiff's case and dismissed the action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Brian J. Isaac, for plaintiff-appellant.

Grace Goodman, for defendants-respondents.

Before: Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Lerner, Friedman, Marlow, JJ.


In this case involving the belated arrival of an ambulance, plaintiff failed to meet her burden of establishing the existence of a special relationship running from the municipality to plaintiff or her decedent (see Cuffy v. City of New York, 69 N.Y.2d 255, 260). Therefore, plaintiff did not establish the narrow exception to the general rule that a municipality cannot be held liable for its failure to protect the public at large from harm, and the court properly granted defendants a directed verdict.

Plaintiff failed to establish any direct contact between either herself or the decedent and the 911 operators. The persons who made 911 calls were disinterested nonparty volunteers, who were not acting at the direction of either plaintiff or the decedent. Accordingly, the direct contact requirement for the special relationship exception was not satisfied (see Cuffy, supra at 261-262; Hancock v. City of New York, 230 A.D.2d 603; Helman v. County of Warren, 111 A.D.2d 560, 561-562,affd 67 N.Y.2d 799).

Furthermore, plaintiff did not establish reliance, another requirement of the special relationship exception. While plaintiff claims she delayed in taking the decedent to a hospital by taxi in reliance on her expectation of the imminent arrival of an ambulance, there is no evidence that any of the 911 operators ever gave any indication of when an ambulance would be arriving.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Baez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 28, 2003
309 A.D.2d 679 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Baez v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:HILDA BAEZ, ETC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 28, 2003

Citations

309 A.D.2d 679 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
765 N.Y.S.2d 875

Citing Cases

Laratro v. City of New York

The Court of Appeals has enunciated a general rule that, as a matter of policy, municipalities will not be…

Ilyayeve v. City of N.Y.

Under the foregoing circumstances, including that the call was not initiated at Khaimov's request, and where…