Wadler v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wadler v. City of New York

57 A.D.3d 333, 869 N.Y.2d 444

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

DecidedDecember 18, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.3d 333 (Wadler v. City of New York) 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

Wadler v. City of New York, 57 A.D.3d 333, 869 N.Y.2d 444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff, a police officer, was injured while driving his assigned police car across a security barrier at the entrance to the parking garage at One Police Plaza. The four-foot-high barrier had been lowered to permit plaintiff to pass but was raised again before his car cleared it, and the front end of the car was jerked into the air. Plaintiff is barred by the firefighter’s rule from recovering on his common-law negligence claims because “the acts undertaken in the performance of police duties placed him ... at increased risk for that accident to happen” (Zanghi v Niagara Frontier Transp. Commn., 85 NY2d 423, 440 [1995]; Melendez v City of New York, 271 AD2d 416, 417 [2000]; Simons v City of New York, 252 AD2d 451 [1998]; see also Grogan v City of New York, 259 AD2d 240 [1999]).

We have considered plaintiffs other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Tom, Buckley, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ. [See 2008 NY Slip Op 30572(U).]

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

Plaintiff, a police officer, was injured while driving his assigned police car across a security barrier at the entrance to the parking garage at One Police Plaza. The four-foot-high barrier had been lowered to permit plaintiff to pass but was raised again before his car cleared it, and the front end of the car was jerked into the air. Plaintiff is barred by the firefighter’s rule from recovering on his common-law negligence claims because “the acts undertaken in the performance of police duties placed him ... at increased risk for that accident to happen” (Zanghi v Niagara Frontier Transp. Commn., 85 NY2d 423, 440 [1995]; Melendez v City of New York, 271 AD2d 416, 417 [2000]; Simons v City of New York, 252 AD2d 451 [1998]; see also Grogan v City of New York, 259 AD2d 240 [1999]).

We have considered plaintiffs other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Tom, Buckley, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ. [See 2008 NY Slip Op 30572(U).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.3d 333, 869 N.Y.2d 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wadler-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack