McNair v. State

18 Misc. 2d 525, 190 N.Y.S.2d 471, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3083
CourtNew York Court of Claims
DecidedSeptember 3, 1959
DocketClaim No. 34408
StatusPublished

This text of 18 Misc. 2d 525 (McNair 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
McNair v. State, 18 Misc. 2d 525, 190 N.Y.S.2d 471, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3083 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1959).

Opinion

Richard S. Heller, J.

On September 8,1955, John F. McNair, an infant eight years of age, was walking along a pathway within the right of way of the New England section of the New York State Thruway when the path gave way and he fell some 38 feet to the grade level of the roadway.

The path, in constant use by the public, was at the top of a sheer rock embankment which had been blasted by a contractor for the purpose of obtaining a proper grade. The blasting had so weakened the embankment that the accident which occurred was inevitable if the path was ever used.

Although the blasting along the pathway had been completed about one month the Authority had not barricaded the path or erected any sign of warning even though a similar accident had happened shortly before the present case.

While the actual blasting was done by a contractor pursuant to contract, the creation of an inherently dangerous condition of which the State Thruway Authority had notice places the responsibility for failure to guard against injury upon the Authority. (Schwartz v. Merola Bros. Constr. Corp., 290 N. Y. 145; Delaney v. Philhern Realty Holding Corp., 280 N. Y. 461; May v. 11½ East 49th St. Co., 296 N. Y. 599.)

Children other than the infant claimant used this path at will and they all were spectators at the building of the road. The creation of a deceptive trap does not excuse the negligence of the Thruway Authority even though the infant was a trespasser. (Mayer v. Temple Props., 307 N. Y. 559; Levine v. City of New York, 309 N. Y. 88.) The facts in the instant case would indicate that the infant was a licensee. (Stanton v. Tami Ami Realty Co., 309 N. Y. 953.)

The court has adopted the claimants’ findings and conclusions in this case and has made an award to the claimant, David T. McNair, individually, in the amount of $4,558.70 and to David T. McNair, as guardian ad litem of John F. McNair, in the amount of $30,000. The findings submitted by the State have also been marked by the court.

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

Related

Mayer v. Temple Properties Inc.
122 N.E.2d 909 (New York Court of Appeals, 1954)
Schwartz v. Merola Bros. Construction Corp.
48 N.E.2d 299 (New York Court of Appeals, 1943)
May v. 11 1/2 East 49th Street Co., Inc.
68 N.E.2d 881 (New York Court of Appeals, 1946)
Delaney v. Philhern Realty Holding Corp.
21 N.E.2d 507 (New York Court of Appeals, 1939)
Levine v. City of New York
127 N.E.2d 825 (New York Court of Appeals, 1955)
Stanton v. Tami Ami Realty Co.
132 N.E.2d 324 (New York Court of Appeals, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 Misc. 2d 525, 190 N.Y.S.2d 471, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3083, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcnair-v-state-nyclaimsct-1959.