In Bard v. Jahnke, the New York Court of Appeals addressed whether a property owner could be held liable for injuries caused by a domestic animal—specifically, a dairy bull—under a common-law negligence theory. The court considered whether an owner could be held responsible for failing to warn or restrain an…
New York Personal Injury Lawyer Blog 24/7
When a Broken Lock Leads to Tragedy. Scurry v New York City Housing Authority, 2023 NY Slip Op 02752
In Scurry v New York City Housing Authority, the New York Court of Appeals considered whether the Housing Authority could avoid liability where intruders gained access to buildings through doors with broken locks and committed violent attacks. The key question was whether the targeted nature of the attacks severed the…
When Can a Product Be Defective Under Warranty But Not Strict Liability? Denny v. Ford Motor Co., 87 N.Y.2d 248 (1995)
In product liability law, plaintiffs often sue under both strict products liability and breach of implied warranty. In Denny v. Ford Motor Co., 87 N.Y.2d 248 (1995), the New York Court of Appeals addressed whether a manufacturer could be held liable under one theory but not the other. The court…
Summary Judgment Granted to City After Park Injury Involving Metal Panel. K.B. v. City of Mount Vernon, 2024 NY Slip Op 04299 (App. Div. 2d Dep’t Aug. 28, 2024)
In K.B. v. City of Mount Vernon, 2024 NY Slip Op 04299, the Appellate Division, Second Department addressed whether the City of Mount Vernon could be held liable for injuries allegedly caused by a defect in a public park. The infant plaintiff was injured when a hinged metal panel covering…
Injury Claims Denied in Baler Machine Case Due to Modification. Cacciola v. Selco Balers, Inc., 127 F. Supp. 2d 175 (E.D.N.Y. 2001)
In product liability cases, courts often examine how a product was used at the time of the accident and whether it had been changed from its original condition. In the case of Cacciola v. Selco Balers, Inc., the court had to decide whether a manufacturer could be held responsible for…
Was General Motors Liable for the Design of the 1973 Chevrolet Malibu? Cover v. Cohen, 61 N.Y.2d 261 (1984)
In Cover v. Cohen, the New York Court of Appeals reviewed whether a car manufactured by General Motors was defective under strict products liability. The case also considered whether the evidence presented at trial was proper and whether the judgment against both General Motors and the car dealer, Kinney Motors,…
State Held Liable for Wrongful Death During Attica Prison Riot. Jones v. State of New York, 33 N.Y.2d 275 (1973)
In Jones v. State of New York, 33 N.Y.2d 275 (1973), the New York Court of Appeals considered whether the State could be held liable for the wrongful death of a State employee killed during the retaking of Attica Correctional Facility following a prison uprising. The case raised questions about…
Injury Verdict Reduced After Court Review of Pain and Suffering Awards. Young v. Tops Markets, Inc., 283 A.D.2d 923 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
In a personal injury case arising from a workplace fall, the court addressed whether a jury’s award for pain and suffering was excessive. The plaintiff, Thomas J. Young, sustained serious injuries and sued under Labor Law § 240(1). Background Facts Thomas J. Young fell 18 feet while working in April…
Was General Motors Liable for the Design of the 1973 Chevrolet Malibu? Cover v. Cohen, 61 N.Y.2d 261 (1984)
In Cover v. Cohen, the New York Court of Appeals reviewed whether a car manufactured by General Motors was defective under strict products liability. The case also considered whether the evidence presented at trial was proper and whether the judgment against both General Motors and the car dealer, Kinney Motors,…
Worker Injured After Fall from Ladder Recovered Under Labor Law § 240(1). Dibrino v. Rockefeller Center North, Inc., 2024 NY Slip Op 03558 (1st Dept.)
The Appellate Division, First Department, decided the case of Dibrino v. Rockefeller Center North, Inc. on July 2, 2024. The case involved a construction worker who fell from a ladder on a commercial job site in Manhattan. The key question was whether the defendants violated New York Labor Law §…