Cercone v. Norstar Bank, N. A., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cercone v. Norstar Bank, N. A., Inc.

199 A.D.2d 987, 608 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12583

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1993

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 199 A.D.2d 987 (Cercone v. Norstar Bank, N. A., Inc.) 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

Cercone v. Norstar Bank, N. A., Inc., 199 A.D.2d 987, 608 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12583 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Neither defendant Norstar Bank, N. A., Inc., nor defendant F. Wesley Moffett had a duty to protect plaintiff’s decedent from being fatally assaulted while making a deposit at the night deposit box of Norstar’s branch bank. The assault upon decedent was not reasonably foreseeable because past experience at the branch bank did not give defendants reason to know that there was a likelihood of such conduct. The fact that such conduct was conceivable did not mean that it was foreseeable (see, Golombek v Marine Midland Bank, 193 AD2d 1113; Dyer v Norstar Bank, 186 AD2d 1083, lv denied 81 NY2d 703). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Galloway, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Balio, Fallon and Davis, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Neither defendant Norstar Bank, N. A., Inc., nor defendant F. Wesley Moffett had a duty to protect plaintiff’s decedent from being fatally assaulted while making a deposit at the night deposit box of Norstar’s branch bank. The assault upon decedent was not reasonably foreseeable because past experience at the branch bank did not give defendants reason to know that there was a likelihood of such conduct. The fact that such conduct was conceivable did not mean that it was foreseeable (see, Golombek v Marine Midland Bank, 193 AD2d 1113; Dyer v Norstar Bank, 186 AD2d 1083, lv denied 81 NY2d 703). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Galloway, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Balio, Fallon and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 987, 608 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cercone-v-norstar-bank-n-a-inc-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack