Home/Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York/Lo Vico v. Consolidated Edison Co.

Lo Vico v. Consolidated Edison Co.

99 Misc. 2d 897, 420 N.Y.S.2d 825, 1979 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2355
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedApril 17, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 99 Misc. 2d 897 (Lo Vico v. Consolidated Edison Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lo Vico v. Consolidated Edison Co., 99 Misc. 2d 897, 420 N.Y.S.2d 825, 1979 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2355 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgments in favor of plaintiffs against Consolidated Edison reversed without costs and complaints dismissed.

This consolidated appeal involves several actions to recover damages for food spoilage resulting from the New York City blackout of July, 1977. An issue is raised herein concerning the validity of Consolidated Edison’s tariff which gives the utility a limited exemption from liability for damages caused by its ordinary negligence resulting in the interruption in the regular supply of service. This limited exemption was validly approved by the Public Service Commission, and is lawful (Lee v Consolidated Edison Co. of N. Y., 95 Misc 2d 120, revd on other grounds 98 Misc 2d 304; Newman v Consolidated Edison Co., 79 Misc 2d 153; see Devers v Long Is. Light. Co., 79 Misc 2d 165). We note that as to damages resulting from the supply or use of electricity, as opposed to damages caused by the interruption of the supply of service, the utility is not absolved from liability for its ordinary negligence (see 16 NYCRR 218.1). While Consolidated Edison would be liable for its gross negligence causing an interruption of service, the record before this court does not establish any conduct constituting gross negligence.

Concur: Pino, P. J. and Buschmann, J.; Weinstein, J., taking no part.

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

Related

City of Buffalo v. National Fuel Corp.
1 Misc. 3d 857 (Buffalo City Court, 2003)
Higgins v. New York City Housing Authority
186 Misc. 2d 562 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Higgins v. New York City Housing Authority
182 Misc. 2d 728 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1999)
Wampler Foods, Inc. v. City of Harrisonburg
49 Va. Cir. 149 (Rockingham County Circuit Court, 1999)
Zoller v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
137 A.D.2d 947 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. City of New Rochelle
136 Misc. 2d 505 (New York Supreme Court, 1987)
Landrum v. Florida Power & Light Co.
505 So. 2d 552 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Koch v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.
468 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
Shaid v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.
95 A.D.2d 610 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Sisters of St. Dominic v. Orange & Rockland Power Co.
79 A.D.2d 1021 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
Shankman v. Consolidated Edison Co.
99 Misc. 2d 956 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
99 Misc. 2d 897, 420 N.Y.S.2d 825, 1979 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lo-vico-v-consolidated-edison-co-nyappterm-1979.