Lavenia v. State

113 Misc. 114
CourtNew York Court of Claims
DecidedSeptember 15, 1920
DocketClaim No. 16629
StatusPublished

This text of 113 Misc. 114 (Lavenia v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lavenia v. State, 113 Misc. 114 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1920).

Opinion

Morschattser, J.

The claimant filed a claim against the state alleging that he sustained injuries and was damaged in the sum of $7,000. The claim was filed pursuant to chapter 814 of the Laws of 1920, which reads as follows:

“AN ACT to confer jurisdiction on the court of claims to hear, audit and determine the claims of Frank DiMarco, an infant, Frances DiMarco, an infant, and Matteo Lavenia, all of Albany, New York, against the state of New York for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by them at the hands of a member of the National Guard of the state of New York, in or in the immediate vicinity of Lincoln park, near Swan street, in the city of Albany and state of New York, and to render judgment therefor.

The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:

‘ Section 1. Jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon the court of claims to hear, audit and determine an alleged claim of Frank DiMarco, an infant, Frances' DiMarco, an infant, and Matteo Lavenia, all of the city of Albany, New York, against the state, on account of the following alleged facts: That the claimants on or about the twenty-first day of April, nineteen hundred and nineteen, while lawfully in Lincoln park, near Swan street, in the city of Albany, New York, witnessing a sham battle which was being conducted there, in which members of the National Guard of the state of New York took part, under the command of its officers, received permanent injuries by being shot without cause or provocation, while [116]*116such guardsman was in the actual performance of his duty as a member of such guard; or under the direction and orders of his superior officers, using for such purpose rifles under the charge and control of officers of said National Guard and one or more live cartridges causing the injuries to claimants; and if the court finds that such injuries were so sustained, and that the claimants were free from contributory negligence, damages therefor shall constitute a legal and valid claim against the state, and the court may award to and render judgment for the claimants for such sums as may be just and equitable.

“ § 2. The state hereby consents to have its liability on such claims determined notwithstanding the failure of said Frank DiMarco, Frances DiMarco and Matteo Lavenia to file their notice of intention to file such claim, and claim within the time prescribed by law, provided that such claim be filed with the attorney-general and court of claims within six months after the taking effect of this act.

££ § 3. This act shall take effect immediately.’’

During the last world war the United States government, in order to obtain funds to carry on the war, issued and sold Liberty Bonds and to aid the government many patriotic citizens took an active part in getting persons to purchase these bonds and for the purpose of arousing enthusiasm and promoting the sale of these bonds arranged with the state authorities and federal authorities to have a sham battle, which finally took place at Lincoln Park, near Swan street, in the city of Albany, N. Y., on the 21st day of April, 1919, at 4 p. m. of that day. The fact that the sham battle was to take place at that time was extensively advertised in the daily papers and the public was invited to witness it and at the sham battle a large number of persons were present to view the battle. [117]*117The New York State Militia, which took part in the sham battle, was composed of four companies, namely, A, B, C and D, commanded by Col. Charles E. Walsh and Lieutenants Norris and -Sckimpf. Six machine guns and two whippet tanks furnished by the federal government also took part in this battle. The State Militia at the time was using Springfield rifles, all firing blank cartridges. The State Militia, composed of infantrymen, and the tanks together were to attack the machine guns and drive them out of their nests. In the battle many blank cartridges were fired by the State Militia, the tanks and the machine guns. The machine guns and the tanks were under the control and direction of United States Army officers and the State Militia under the control and direction of the New York National Guard.

Lincoln Park is bounded by four streets in the city of Albany and is about 600 feet in width and 1,200 feet in length. The surface of the ground of the park is somewhat lower on the eastern side than the surface of the streets around it and forms, as the witnesses say, an amphitheater. Swan street, located on the south of the park, runs at right angles to the park and terminates at the park. The machine guns were placed at or near Swan street, on the southerly side of the park. The tanks and infantrymen were on the opposite side, approaching the machine guns and were firing and shooting cartridges at the time. The claimant was standing on the south side of the park, near Swan street, viewing the sham battle. He had his hand on the shoulders or head of one Frank DiMarco, a small boy, who stood facing the park, and directly behind the claimant was one Frances DiMarco. While the three-persons named were standing in this position, a nickel steel jacketed bullet was fired from some rifle or gun located northerly of the claimant, [118]*118the bullet being shot in a southerly direction. This bullet passed through the head of the child, Frank DiMarco, and then entered the right wrist or forearm of the claimant and also penetrated some part of the body of Frances DiMarco, who was in the rear of the claimant. The next morning, upon an examination being made of the ground near where the claimant stood at the time of the accident, there was found a pool of bipod and a bullet which was of the weight, size, kind and caliber used in the model of the Springfield rifles that the State Militia was using in this sham battle. This bullet calipered 307 to 310 thousandths, weighed 148 grains, was nickel-jacketed and made to fit a United States cartridge, 1906, model.

When the State Militia assembled at the State Armory, before the sham battle, to receive from the oEcers the rifles and ammunition that were to be used, a very rigid and thorough examination was made by the oEcers of the State Militia. The cartridges were examined and the rifles to be used were opened and inspected, and the clothing of the men was examined. The cartridges to be used on that occasion were ordered to be blank cartridges, from the ammunition factory, and all the boxes containing the cartridges and the contents were examined by the oEcers, and the oEcers in charge of the sham battle all testified that nothing but blank cartridges was issued or in use at the time of the sham battle by the State Militia. The cartridges used by the infantrymen, composing the State Militia, at that time were all in clips holding five cartridges each. One clip was placed in a rifle in loading and five shots were fired from the rifle in succession, before reloading. The whippet tanks had machine guns and one of the tanks was firing at the time of the accident to the claimant, and the testimony of the oEcer operating the tank at the time was to the [119]*119effect that the bullets used in the machine guns when they were firing bullets were of the same size, style, weight and caliber as used in Springfield rifles. The officer in charge of the tank, Capt. C. H. Barnard, testified that there was in use at that time in the tank a Marlin machine gun, the cartridges used by the gun being similar to those used in the United States magazine rifle thirty caliber, sometimes miscalled “ Springfield rifle.”

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

Related

Lopez v. . Campbell
57 N.E. 501 (New York Court of Appeals, 1900)
Smith v. . State of New York
125 N.E. 841 (New York Court of Appeals, 1920)
Ruppert v. . Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co.
47 N.E. 971 (New York Court of Appeals, 1897)
O'Reilly v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad
82 A.D. 492 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 Misc. 114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lavenia-v-state-nyclaimsct-1920.