Waldon v. Little Flower Children's Service

808 N.E.2d 852, 1 N.Y.3d 612, 776 N.Y.S.2d 532, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 170
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 17, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 808 N.E.2d 852 (Waldon v. Little Flower Children's Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Waldon v. Little Flower Children's Service, 808 N.E.2d 852, 1 N.Y.3d 612, 776 N.Y.S.2d 532, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 170 (N.Y. 2004).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint granted, and the certified question answered in the negative.

Plaintiff foster parent was stabbed by her foster child’s biological mother as she was leaving the premises of defendant Little Flower Children’s Service, a private social services agency, after the agency supervised a visit between the child and her biological mother. Supreme Court denied the motion of the agency and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and the Appellate Divi[614]*614sion affirmed, with one Justice dissenting, concluding that triable issues of fact necessitated a trial. We disagree.

Assuming the agency owed the foster parent a duty of care, no evidence was proffered raising a question of fact on the issues of breach or causation. Although the biological mother had a history of mental illness, she had no history of violence, nor had she threatened agency staff or the foster parent in the past. The agency therefore had no reason to anticipate a violent outburst or to take steps to prevent contact between the biological mother and the foster parent. In addition, due to the suddenness of the attack and its location, the agency’s security staff had no opportunity to intervene to assist the foster parent. Under the circumstances of this case, defendants-appellants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed, etc.

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

Related

SCVAWCR-Doe v. Archdiocese of N.Y.
2024 NY Slip Op 50330(U) (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, 2024)
Mitchell v. Just Lorraine's Place, LLC
2023 NY Slip Op 01480 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Musano v. City of New York
2020 NY Slip Op 2368 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Piazza v. Regeis Care Center, L.L.C.
47 A.D.3d 551 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
808 N.E.2d 852, 1 N.Y.3d 612, 776 N.Y.S.2d 532, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waldon-v-little-flower-childrens-service-ny-2004.