Yannacci v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yannacci v. New York City Transit Authority

129 A.D.2d 698, 514 N.Y.S.2d 461, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45387

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

DecidedApril 20, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 129 A.D.2d 698 (Yannacci v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Yannacci v. New York City Transit Authority, 129 A.D.2d 698, 514 N.Y.S.2d 461, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45387 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rader, J.), dated August 7, 1986, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

[699]*699Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On the afternoon of June 28, 1982, the defendant’s bus allegedly struck a pothole filled with water. This caused the water to spray onto the plaintiff which caused her to fall to the ground, resulting in her injuries. The defendant contends that as a matter of law the risk of injury was unforeseeable.

It is the risk of' injury which must be a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s actions (see, Danielenko v Kinney Rent A Car, 57 NY2d 198), not the manner in which the injury occurs (Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308). In this case varying inferences are possible and thus a question for the trier of fact is presented (see, Ventricelli v Kinney Sys. Rent A Car, 45 NY2d 950). Therefore, summary judgment was properly denied. Thompson, J. P., Weinstein, Kunzeman and Harwood, 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, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rader, J.), dated August 7, 1986, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

[699]*699Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On the afternoon of June 28, 1982, the defendant’s bus allegedly struck a pothole filled with water. This caused the water to spray onto the plaintiff which caused her to fall to the ground, resulting in her injuries. The defendant contends that as a matter of law the risk of injury was unforeseeable.

It is the risk of' injury which must be a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s actions (see, Danielenko v Kinney Rent A Car, 57 NY2d 198), not the manner in which the injury occurs (Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308). In this case varying inferences are possible and thus a question for the trier of fact is presented (see, Ventricelli v Kinney Sys. Rent A Car, 45 NY2d 950). Therefore, summary judgment was properly denied. Thompson, J. P., Weinstein, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 A.D.2d 698, 514 N.Y.S.2d 461, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yannacci-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack