Valdes v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Valdes v. New York City Housing Authority

244 A.D.2d 175, 665 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11054

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 6, 1997·Published

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about November 13, 1996, which granted defendant New York City Housing Authority’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly dismissed the complaint for failure to allege facts supporting the existence of the “special relationship” required in order to impose liability on defendant for failing to provide adequate police protection (see, Cuffy v City of New York, 69 NY2d 255). Such relationship cannot be premised upon an alleged 911 call made by a third party to the police (see, Harris v New York City Hous. Auth., 187 AD2d 362). In addition, plaintiffs failed to establish that defendant owned, operated, managed, controlled or maintained the grocery store where the infant plaintiff was allegedly injured. Concur— Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Mazzarelli and Colabella, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about November 13, 1996, which granted defendant New York City Housing Authority’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly dismissed the complaint for failure to allege facts supporting the existence of the “special relationship” required in order to impose liability on defendant for failing to provide adequate police protection (see, Cuffy v City of New York, 69 NY2d 255). Such relationship cannot be premised upon an alleged 911 call made by a third party to the police (see, Harris v New York City Hous. Auth., 187 AD2d 362). In addition, plaintiffs failed to establish that defendant owned, operated, managed, controlled or maintained the grocery store where the infant plaintiff was allegedly injured. Concur— Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Mazzarelli and Colabella, JJ.

Valdes v. New York City Housing Authority, 244 A.D.2d 175, 665 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

244 A.D.2d 175 (Valdes v. New York City Housing Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related