(DOWNLOAD) "Louis H. Rubsam v. Emily Alexander" by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Louis H. Rubsam v. Emily Alexander
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 04, 1991
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 64 KB
Description
DECISION & ORDER On the evening of October 1, 1982, the injured plaintiff, a Suffolk County police detective, was on the premises of the Admiralty Condominium complex to investigate a rash of burglary complaints. While engaged in a nighttime stakeout on the premises, he received a report of a suspicious vehicle on the condominium grounds. After investigating this report and finding nothing, he proceeded to his stakeout position. Rather than passing through the condominium complex gate, or the security gate adjacent to the accident site, he scaled a five-foot high wall separating the condominium complex from Montauk Highway, and was injured as he landed on a pile of hardened concrete which had been discarded at the base of the wall. We agree with the conclusion of the Supreme Court that the plaintiffs' suit is not barred by the rule of Santangelo v State of New York (71 N.Y.2d 393), as the negligence complained of, the failure to maintain the premises in a safe condition which caused the injury, was not related to the situation which created the need for the injured plaintiff's services (see, Murphy v Creative Foods Corp., A.D.2d [2d Dept., Feb. 4, 1991]; Janeczko v Duhl, 166 A.D.2d 257; Sharkey v Mitchell's Newspaper Del. Inc., 165 A.D.2d 664; Guadagno v Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 155 A.D.2d 981; Starkey v Trancamp Contr. Corp., 152 A.D.2d 358). However, where injuries are sustained as a result of an alleged failure to maintain property in a reasonably safe condition, liability is governed by the ""standard of reasonable care under the circumstances whereby foreseeability shall be a measure of liability"" (Basso v Miller, 40 N.Y.2d 233, 241). Under the circumstances presented by this case, we find, as a matter of law, that the appellants could not reasonably foresee that the plaintiff would climb over the wall of the condominium complex and jump down onto its grounds, thereby injuring himself (see, Guida v 154 W. 14th St. Co., 13 A.D.2d 695, affd 11 N.Y.2d 731; Beedenbender v. Midtown Properties., 4 A.D.2d 276). Accordingly, the appellants may not be held liable for the unforeseeable injuries suffered (see, Mulholland v Willis, A.D.2d [decided herewith]).
 "Louis H. Rubsam v. Emily Alexander" by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}