From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Berotte v. Hiram

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 31, 1991
173 A.D.2d 754 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

May 31, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Although the plaintiff, a Nassau County police officer, was on duty at the time his vehicle was involved in a collision with that of the defendants, we find that his services were "sufficiently separate and apart from the negligent acts which caused his injuries" (Boglioli v Fletcher, 170 A.D.2d 425, 426) to permit him to maintain this action sounding, inter alia, in common-law negligence. Thus, the action is not barred by operation of the "fireman's rule", enunciated in Santangelo v State of New York ( 71 N.Y.2d 393, 397-398), and the second affirmative defense, which relies upon the Santangelo doctrine, was properly stricken.

No other issue has been raised or considered. Mangano, P.J., Brown, Sullivan, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Berotte v. Hiram

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 31, 1991
173 A.D.2d 754 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Berotte v. Hiram

Case Details

Full title:ROLAND C. BEROTTE, Respondent, v. DENIS HIRAM et al., Appellants

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

Date published: May 31, 1991

Citations

173 A.D.2d 754 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
570 N.Y.S.2d 629