Brofsky v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brofsky v. City of New York

172 A.D.2d 640, 570 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4881

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 15, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 640 (Brofsky v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brofsky v. City of New York, 172 A.D.2d 640, 570 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Da’Jarm Construction Company, Inc., and B. G. National Plumbing & Heating Corp. separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated October 6, 1989, which denied their respective motions to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The appellants moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiffs common-law negligence action was barred by the so-called "fireman’s rule” (see, Santangelo v State of New York, 71 NY2d 393). The plaintiff, a New York City police officer, was allegedly injured when he stepped into a pothole on a public street. We find that the appellants’ motions were properly denied as the traffic condition which necessitated the officer’s services at that location was sufficiently separate and apart from the alleged negligent acts which caused his injuries (see, Murphy v Creative Foods Corp., 170 AD2d 441; Janeczko v Duhl, 166 AD2d 257; Starkey v Trancamp Contr. Corp., 152 AD2d 358; Burnside v City of New York, 144 Misc 2d 183). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Da’Jarm Construction Company, Inc., and B. G. National Plumbing & Heating Corp. separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated October 6, 1989, which denied their respective motions to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The appellants moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiffs common-law negligence action was barred by the so-called "fireman’s rule” (see, Santangelo v State of New York, 71 NY2d 393). The plaintiff, a New York City police officer, was allegedly injured when he stepped into a pothole on a public street. We find that the appellants’ motions were properly denied as the traffic condition which necessitated the officer’s services at that location was sufficiently separate and apart from the alleged negligent acts which caused his injuries (see, Murphy v Creative Foods Corp., 170 AD2d 441; Janeczko v Duhl, 166 AD2d 257; Starkey v Trancamp Contr. Corp., 152 AD2d 358; Burnside v City of New York, 144 Misc 2d 183). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 640, 570 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brofsky-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack