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

Newman v. Consolidated Edison Co.

79 Misc. 2d 153, 360 N.Y.S.2d 141, 1973 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1265
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedJuly 19, 1973
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 79 Misc. 2d 153 (Newman 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
Newman v. Consolidated Edison Co., 79 Misc. 2d 153, 360 N.Y.S.2d 141, 1973 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1265 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Opinion

Memorandum. Judgment unanimously reversed, with $10 costs to defendant, and new trial ordered.

In our opinion, it was error to refuse to admit into evidence the printed copy of Consolidated Edison’s rate schedule, although uncertified, which showed “ a public service commission- * * * number of this state and an effective date ” (CPLR 4540, subd. ¡[d]). Said copy is prima facie evidence of the filed original tariff or classification and, pursuant thereto, defendant is not liable for the interruption of its supply of service arising from the ordinary negligence of' its employees, servants or agents. The Public Service Commission has approved this limited exemption from liability, in the valid exercise of its powers (Public Service Law, § 66, subds. 5, 12; See Matter of Leitner v. New York Tel. Co., 277 N. Y. 180). There is no attempt to absolve Consolidated Edison from liability for its gross negligence. Moreover, since the scope of the exemption is limited to those acts which disrupt the regular supply of service, it does not violate public policy .(Hamilton Employment Service v. New York Tel. Co., 253 N. Y. 468) and is lawful (Public Service Law, § 65, subd. 5).

Under the circumstances, .there should be a new trial.

Concur — Groat, P. J., Margett and Rinaldi, JJ.

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

Related

Empire One Telecommunications, Inc. v. Verizon New York, Inc.
26 Misc. 3d 541 (New York Supreme Court, 2009)
Ricciardi v. Edison
161 Misc. 2d 917 (Yonkers City Court, 1994)
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Ferranti-Packard Transformers, Inc.
157 Misc. 2d 606 (New York Supreme Court, 1993)
Professional Answering Service, Inc. v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co.
565 A.2d 55 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1989)
Landrum v. Florida Power & Light Co.
505 So. 2d 552 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Veals v. Consolidated Edison Co.
114 Misc. 2d 626 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1982)
Lo Vico v. Consolidated Edison Co.
99 Misc. 2d 897 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Lee v. Consolidated Edison Co.
98 Misc. 2d 304 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee
580 F.2d 1122 (Second Circuit, 1978)
Lee v. Consolidated Edison Co.
95 Misc. 2d 120 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1978)
Shankman v. Consolidated Edison Co.
94 Misc. 2d 150 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1978)
Devers v. Long Island Lighting Co.
79 Misc. 2d 165 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 Misc. 2d 153, 360 N.Y.S.2d 141, 1973 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newman-v-consolidated-edison-co-nyappterm-1973.