Home/New York Court of Appeals/Ast v. State

Ast v. State

66 N.Y.2d 998
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 19, 1985
DocketClaim No. 64247
StatusPublished

This text of 66 N.Y.2d 998 (Ast v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ast v. State, 66 N.Y.2d 998 (N.Y. 1985).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

State Police urgently invoking the assistance of a Thruway toll collector to stop a fleeing vehicle owe a duty of due care to assure that compliance with their request does not expose the individual to a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm (see, Thain v City of New York, 35 AD2d 545, affd 30 NY2d 524; Schuster v City of New York, 5 NY2d 75, 81, 84; Lubelfeld v City of New York, 4 NY2d 455). The affirmed findings, supported by the record, that this duty was breached and that such breach was a proximate cause of injury are beyond our review (Humphrey v State of New York, 60 NY2d 742).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lubelfeld v. City of New York
151 N.E.2d 862 (New York Court of Appeals, 1958)
Schuster v. City of New York
154 N.E.2d 534 (New York Court of Appeals, 1958)
Thain v. City of New York
280 N.E.2d 892 (New York Court of Appeals, 1972)
Humphrey v. State
457 N.E.2d 767 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
Thain v. City of New York
35 A.D.2d 545 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 N.Y.2d 998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ast-v-state-ny-1985.