In Murphy v. De Revere (304 N.Y. 922), Nuss v. State of New York (301 N.Y. 768) and Van de Walker v. State of New York (278 N.Y. 454), the court was solely concerned with the defendant's liability for improper maintenance or operation of a traffic signal, not its planning or designing. And, in Eastman v. State of New York (303 N.Y. 691), although the suit seems to have been predicated, in part, on the State's negligence in planning an intersection without a stop sign, our affirmance rested on an entirely different theory.Summary of this case from Weiss v. Fote
Argued November 19, 1952
Decided January 15, 1953
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, SCHMIDT, J.
William F. McNulty and Ubaldo N. Marino for appellants.
Donald A. Walsh for New York State Conference of Mayors and Other Municipal Officials, amicus curiae, in support of appellants' position.
Thomas J. O'Neill, Morton Sokol and Daniel Danziger for plaintiffs-respondents.
Oliver K. King for defendant-respondent.
Judgments affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: LEWIS, CONWAY, DYE and FROESSEL, JJ. LOUGHRAN, Ch. J., DESMOND and FULD, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal of the judgments and dismissal of the complaint.