McGhee v. New York Times, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McGhee v. New York Times, Inc.

261 A.D.2d 320, 691 N.Y.S.2d 413, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5813

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

DecidedMay 25, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 320 (McGhee v. New York Times, 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

McGhee v. New York Times, Inc., 261 A.D.2d 320, 691 N.Y.S.2d 413, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5813 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered on or about September 22, 1997, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaints, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly assaulted, after a traffic accident, by a truck driver, who was employed by defendant New York Times as a deliveryman. The assault was outside the scope of the driver’s employment, and accordingly the Times cannot be held liable for plaintiff’s injuries caused by the assault (Adams v New York City Tr. Auth., 88 NY2d 116; Kwak v Wolfenson, 258 AD2d 418; Nicollette T. v Hospital for Joint Diseases, 198 AD2d 54). The record is clear that plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the assault, and not the collision. The statement of plaintiff’s physician to the contrary was properly rejected as speculative, and not based on facts in the record. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered on or about September 22, 1997, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaints, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly assaulted, after a traffic accident, by a truck driver, who was employed by defendant New York Times as a deliveryman. The assault was outside the scope of the driver’s employment, and accordingly the Times cannot be held liable for plaintiff’s injuries caused by the assault (Adams v New York City Tr. Auth., 88 NY2d 116; Kwak v Wolfenson, 258 AD2d 418; Nicollette T. v Hospital for Joint Diseases, 198 AD2d 54). The record is clear that plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the assault, and not the collision. The statement of plaintiff’s physician to the contrary was properly rejected as speculative, and not based on facts in the record. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 320, 691 N.Y.S.2d 413, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcghee-v-new-york-times-inc-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack