Ford v. State of New York

121 A.D.3d 749, 993 N.Y.S.2d 760
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 8, 2014
Docket2013-10539
StatusPublished

This text of 121 A.D.3d 749 (Ford v. State 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
Ford v. State of New York, 121 A.D.3d 749, 993 N.Y.S.2d 760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the claimant appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Mignano, J.), dated August 7, 2013, which, after a nonjury *750 trial, is in favor of the defendant and against her dismissing the claim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The claimant was visiting her boyfriend, a prisoner at the Sing Sing Correctional Facility, a maximum security prison, when she was assaulted by an inmate in the visiting room. The claimant did not know the inmate, and the attack was sudden and unprovoked. Several employees of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision testified at trial that, to their knowledge, no visitor to the Sing Sing Correctional Facility had ever been attacked by an inmate in the visiting room prior to the subject incident. Following a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, the Court of Claims dismissed the claim.

Contrary to the claimant’s contentions, the Court of Claims properly dismissed her claim. Our review of the record of this nonjury trial (see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]; Levin v State of New York, 32 AD3d 501, 502 [2006]) compels the conclusion that the determination of the Court of Claims, finding that the attack on the claimant was not reasonably foreseeable, was warranted by the facts (see Flaherty v State of New York, 296 NY 342 [1947]; Levin v State of New York, 32 AD3d 501 [2006]; cf. Barnette v City of New York, 96 AD3d 700 [2012]; Vasquez v State of New York, 68 AD3d 1275 [2009]).

In view of the foregoing, we do not reach the merits of the remaining contentions raised by the parties.

Mastro, J.P., Chambers, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Flaherty v. State of New York
73 N.E.2d 543 (New York Court of Appeals, 1947)
Northern Westchester Professional Park Associates v. Town of Bedford
458 N.E.2d 809 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
Levin v. State
32 A.D.3d 501 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Vasquez v. State
68 A.D.3d 1275 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Barnette v. City of New York
96 A.D.3d 700 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
121 A.D.3d 749, 993 N.Y.S.2d 760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-state-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2014.