47 Cited authorities

Cohen v. Hallmark Cards
45 N.Y.2d 493 (N.Y. 1978) Cited 1,945 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the standard of review in assessing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is whether there is "simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial"
Applewhite v. Accuhealth, Inc.
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 4727 (N.Y. 2013) Cited 296 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding "municipal emergency response system - including the ambulance assistance rendered by first responders such as FDNY EMTs ...- should be viewed as 'a classic governmental function'"
Friedman v. State of New York
67 N.Y.2d 271 (N.Y. 1986) Cited 458 times
Applying rule to state highway design
Turturro v. City of N.Y.
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 8579 (N.Y. 2016) Cited 161 times
In Turturro, for example, a 12–year–old plaintiff was struck by a speeding car while he attempted to ride his bicycle across a four-lane road as to which the City had received numerous complaints of excessive speed (28 N.Y.3d at 485, 45 N.Y.S.3d 874, 68 N.E.3d 693).
Gilberg v. Barbieri
53 N.Y.2d 285 (N.Y. 1981) Cited 430 times
Concluding conviction for petty offense of harassment did not preclude defendant from contesting merits of subsequent civil suit for assault where defendant did not have incentive to litigate thoroughly in prior action given the "minor" significance of the petty violation, the lack of a right to a jury trial, the lack of vigor typical of the defense of such violations, and the lack of any indication that the parties anticipated the determination would be used against defendant in later litigation
Mazella v. Beals
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 5182 (N.Y. 2016) Cited 151 times
In Mazella v. Beals, 27 N.Y.3d 694, 710, 37 N.Y.S.3d 46, 57 N.E.3d 1083 (2016), the court determined that it had been harmful error for the trial court to have allowed into evidence a consent order somewhat analogous to the consent order at issue here.
Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.
248 N.Y. 339 (N.Y. 1928) Cited 2,024 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that foreseeability is a factor in determining duty and stating that "the orbit of the danger as disclosed to the eye of reasonable vigilance would be the orbit of the duty"
Weiss v. Fote
7 N.Y.2d 579 (N.Y. 1960) Cited 565 times
In Weiss, the New York Court of Appeals found that the City of Buffalo's Board of Safety, having made a reasonable decision with respect to the timing of traffic lights, was not subject to review.
Sheehan v. City of New York
40 N.Y.2d 496 (N.Y. 1976) Cited 339 times
In Sheehan, a bus stopped in a traffic lane rather than by the curb — in violation of regulations — to let passengers on and off. The bus was rear-ended by a sanitation truck, and an injured passenger sued.
Tomassi v. Town of Union
46 N.Y.2d 91 (N.Y. 1978) Cited 288 times
Noting that "utility poles, drainage ditches, culverts, trees and shrubbery are often in close proximity to the traveled right of way ... [b]ut for the careful driver, the placement of these items near the pavement creates no unreasonable danger"
Section 500.13 - Content and form of briefs in normal course appeals
N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.13
(a) Content. All briefs shall conform to the requirements of section 500.1 of this Part and contain a table of contents, a table of cases and authorities, questions presented, point headings, and, if necessary, a disclosure statement pursuant to section 500.1(f) of this Part. Such disclosure statement shall be included before the table of contents in the party's principal brief. Appellant's brief shall include a statement showing that the court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and to review

Linda M. Brown,, Respondent,v.State of New York, Appellant.

47 Cited authorities

Finding "municipal emergency response system - including the ambulance assistance rendered by first responders such as FDNY EMTs ...- should be viewed as 'a classic governmental function'"

Applying rule to state highway design

In Turturro, for example, a 12–year–old plaintiff was struck by a speeding car while he attempted to ride his bicycle across a four-lane road as to which the City had received numerous complaints of excessive speed (28 N.Y.3d at 485, 45 N.Y.S.3d 874, 68 N.E.3d 693).

In Mazella v. Beals, 27 N.Y.3d 694, 710, 37 N.Y.S.3d 46, 57 N.E.3d 1083 (2016), the court determined that it had been harmful error for the trial court to have allowed into evidence a consent order somewhat analogous to the consent order at issue here.

Holding that foreseeability is a factor in determining duty and stating that "the orbit of the danger as disclosed to the eye of reasonable vigilance would be the orbit of the duty"

In Weiss, the New York Court of Appeals found that the City of Buffalo's Board of Safety, having made a reasonable decision with respect to the timing of traffic lights, was not subject to review.

In Sheehan, a bus stopped in a traffic lane rather than by the curb — in violation of regulations — to let passengers on and off. The bus was rear-ended by a sanitation truck, and an injured passenger sued.

Noting that "utility poles, drainage ditches, culverts, trees and shrubbery are often in close proximity to the traveled right of way ... [b]ut for the careful driver, the placement of these items near the pavement creates no unreasonable danger"