Murphy v. Creative Foods Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murphy v. Creative Foods Corp.

170 A.D.2d 441, 565 N.Y.S.2d 229, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1396

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

DecidedFebruary 4, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 170 A.D.2d 441 (Murphy v. Creative Foods Corp.) 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

Murphy v. Creative Foods Corp., 170 A.D.2d 441, 565 N.Y.S.2d 229, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1396 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated July 13, 1989, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs are not foreclosed from bringing the instant action in light of the recent case of Santangelo v State of New York (71 NY2d 393). It is now well established that a police [442]*442officer cannot recover damages for injuries sustained as a result of the negligence that created the occasion for his services (Santangelo v State of New York, supra; Dawes v Ballard, 163 AD2d 508; Wynne v Tullman, 151 AD2d 476). In this case, the injured plaintiff, a police officer, alleged that as he chased a robber he sustained injuries when he fell on a defective sidewalk. Therefore, an issue of negligence was raised, separate and apart from the act which occasioned the officer’s services (see, Starkey v Trancamp Contr. Corp., 152 AD2d 358; see also, Burnside v City of New York, 144 Misc 2d 183). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated July 13, 1989, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs are not foreclosed from bringing the instant action in light of the recent case of Santangelo v State of New York (71 NY2d 393). It is now well established that a police [442]*442officer cannot recover damages for injuries sustained as a result of the negligence that created the occasion for his services (Santangelo v State of New York, supra; Dawes v Ballard, 163 AD2d 508; Wynne v Tullman, 151 AD2d 476). In this case, the injured plaintiff, a police officer, alleged that as he chased a robber he sustained injuries when he fell on a defective sidewalk. Therefore, an issue of negligence was raised, separate and apart from the act which occasioned the officer’s services (see, Starkey v Trancamp Contr. Corp., 152 AD2d 358; see also, Burnside v City of New York, 144 Misc 2d 183). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.D.2d 441, 565 N.Y.S.2d 229, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-creative-foods-corp-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack