New York Personal Injury Lawyer Blog 24/7

Published on: July 3, 2023

Appellate Division considered whether a social host who serves alcohol to an intoxicated person can be held liable for injuries caused by that person to a third party. Vincent v. John Doe #1, 640 N.Y.S.2d 864 (2d Dep’t 1996)

by Stephen Bilkis

In the case of Vincent v. John Doe #1, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, considered the issue of whether a social host who serves alcohol to an intoxicated person can be held liable for injuries caused by that person to a third party. The case has significant implications for the social host liability doctrine in New York.

Factual Background

The plaintiff, Charles Vincent, was a passenger in a car driven by his friend, John McLaughlin, who had been drinking at a party hosted by the defendant, John Doe #1. McLaughlin lost control of the car and crashed, causing Vincent to sustain serious injuries. Vincent filed a lawsuit against McLaughlin and Doe #1, alleging that Doe #1 had served alcohol to McLaughlin, knowing that he was already intoxicated, and was therefore responsible for the injuries sustained in the accident.

Published on: June 28, 2023

The Appellate Division considered whether a hospital can be held liable for injuries sustained by a patient who leaves the hospital against medical advice. Estate of Zani v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 103 A.D.3d 590 (1st Dep’t 2013)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Estate of Zani v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., the New York Appellate Division addressed the issue of whether a hospital can be held liable for injuries sustained by a patient who leaves the hospital against medical advice. The case is significant because it clarifies the extent of a hospital’s duty to its patients and provides guidance on the circumstances under which a hospital can be held liable for injuries sustained by a patient. This blog post will provide an overview of the factual background, holding, and discussion of the case, before concluding with an analysis of its implications for hospital liability.

Factual Background

The plaintiff in Zani was the estate of a man who had been admitted to the hospital for treatment of alcohol withdrawal. The plaintiff alleged that the hospital was negligent in allowing the decedent to leave the hospital against medical advice and without proper precautions.

Published on: June 26, 2023

Court of Appeals considered whether plaintiff’s wrongful death claim was properly dismissed. Adames v. Sheepshead Bay Rd. R.R. Co., 303 N.Y. 208 (1951)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Adames v. Sheepshead Bay Rd. R.R. Co., the New York Court of Appeals addressed the issue of whether a common carrier can be held liable for injuries sustained by a passenger when the passenger voluntarily disembarks from the carrier’s vehicle before reaching their destination. The case is significant because it clarifies the scope of a common carrier’s duty to its passengers and provides guidance on the circumstances under which a carrier can be held liable for injuries sustained by a passenger.

Factual Background

The plaintiff in Adames was a passenger on a bus operated by the Sheepshead Bay Road Railroad Company. The bus was traveling along Ocean Parkway in Brooklyn when the plaintiff signaled the driver to stop so that he could disembark. The plaintiff exited the bus and began to walk across the street, but was struck by a passing car and sustained serious injuries.

Published on: June 21, 2023

Injured worker can sue third party for damages even if workers’ compensation benefits have been paid. Brescia v. G.F. Hämmerle, Inc., 7 N.Y.2d 544 (1960)

by Stephen Bilkis

Brescia v. G.F. Hämmerle, Inc. highlights the rights of injured individuals to pursue damages beyond the scope of workers’ compensation benefits. New York workers’ compensation is a system designed to provide benefits to employees who are injured or become ill on the job. Under New York law, most employers are required to carry workers’ compensation insurance to cover their employees in case of a workplace injury or illness. The benefits available under New York workers’ compensation include medical treatment, lost wages, and disability benefits.

While workers’ compensation benefits can provide important financial support to injured workers, they are often limited in scope and may not fully compensate an injured worker for their losses. In some cases, injured workers may be entitled to pursue additional compensation through a personal injury lawsuit against a third party who may be responsible for their injuries.

Background

Published on: June 19, 2023

Court Discusses the Importance of Informed Consent and Apparent Authority. Johnson v. New York Methodist Hospital, 69 N.E.3d 1045 (N.Y. 2016)

by Stephen Bilkis

Informed consent and apparent authority are two important legal concepts that are relevant in the healthcare industry. Informed consent refers to the right of patients to receive adequate information about their medical treatment options and to make informed decisions about their care. Apparent authority, on the other hand, refers to the legal doctrine that holds hospitals and other healthcare providers responsible for the actions of their employees or agents, even if those actions were not explicitly authorized.

In Johnson v. New York Methodist Hospital the plaintiff alleged that she did not give informed consent for a medical procedure and that the hospital was liable for the actions of an independent contractor who performed the procedure.

Background

Published on: June 14, 2023

Comparative negligence in a Pedestrian Car Accident Case. Kozlowski v. Ringler, 189 A.D.2d 1025 (4th Dep’t 1993)

by Stephen Bilkis

Pedestrian accidents are a significant public health concern that can cause devastating injuries, permanent disabilities, and fatalities. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), pedestrian deaths accounted for 17% of all traffic fatalities in the United States in 2019. Despite the increasing awareness and efforts to reduce pedestrian accidents, they remain a significant problem. In Kozlowski v. Ringler, the court discussed determining liability in pedestrian accidents, including the concept of comparative liability.

In New York, comparative negligence is a legal doctrine that applies in pedestrian car accident cases. This means that the pedestrian’s own negligence or fault in the accident may reduce the amount of compensation they can recover. If the pedestrian is found to be partially at fault, the court will apportion fault between the parties based on their respective degrees of fault.

Background

Published on: June 7, 2023

Court found that the City of New York was liable in an accident involving a police car. Turley v. City of New York, 45 A.D.3d 547 (2nd Dept. 2007)

by Stephen Bilkis

Turley v. City of New York involved a high-speed police chase that resulted in a serious accident, and it has become an important precedent in cases involving police use of force and municipal liability.

Background

On April 22, 1999, Gary Turley was driving his car in Queens when he was struck by a police car driven by Officer Francis X. Lavelle. Officer Lavelle was pursuing a suspect in a high-speed chase when he lost control of his vehicle and collided with Turley’s car. As a result of the accident, Turley suffered serious injuries.

Published on: June 5, 2023

Court determined that in an accident involving a car and a motorcycle, the driver of the car was liable. Anderson v. Aloe, 99 A.D.3d 53 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

by Stephen Bilkis

Anderson v. Aloe highlights the legal responsibilities of motorists when sharing the road with motorcycles. In this case, the plaintiff, Mr. Anderson, suffered severe injuries when a vehicle driven by the defendant, Ms. Aloe, made an abrupt left turn in front of his motorcycle, causing a collision. The case presents a number of important legal issues, including negligence, proximate cause, and comparative fault.

Comparative negligence is a legal principle that is applied in personal injury cases in New York and other states. Under comparative negligence, a plaintiff who is partially at fault for their own injuries can still recover damages from the defendant, but the damages will be reduced by the plaintiff’s percentage of fault.

New York follows a “pure” comparative negligence rule, which means that a plaintiff can recover damages even if they were more than 50% responsible for their own injuries. For example, if a plaintiff is awarded $100,000 in damages but is found to be 30% at fault for the accident, their award will be reduced by 30% to $70,000.

Published on: May 31, 2023

Liability in an accident that involved a motorcycle and a pothole. Karamian v. City of New York, 16 A.D.3d 255 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

by Stephen Bilkis

Potholes are a common cause of motorcycle accidents in New York, with riders being particularly vulnerable to their hazards. The deep, irregular gaps in the road can cause a loss of control or balance, leading to collisions, falls, and serious injuries. When a motorcyclist is injured in an accident that involved a pothole, who is liable?

Karamian v. City of New York involved a motorcyclist who was injured after his motorcycle hit a pothole on a city street. The plaintiff, Mr. Karamian, sued the City of New York for negligence, alleging that the city was responsible for maintaining safe roadways and that its failure to repair the pothole was the direct cause of his injuries. The case eventually made its way to the New York Appellate Division.

Background

Published on: May 29, 2023

Court found that the City of New York was liable for a bike accident due to poor signage. Fox v. City of New York, 157 A.D.2d 260 (1st Dep’t 1990)

by Stephen Bilkis

Bicycling is becoming an increasingly popular mode of transportation in New York City, but it can be dangerous. One of the hazards that cyclists face is poor signage. Poor signage can cause bicycle accidents in a number of way. Poor signage can cause misdirection. If there are no signs indicating where the bicycle lane is or if the signs are unclear or confusing, cyclists may be forced to ride in dangerous areas. If there are no signs warning cyclists of hazards ahead, such as steep hills, sharp turns, or intersections, they may not be prepared to slow down or change direction, which could result in a collision or loss of control. If there are different signs indicating different rules for cyclists in the same area, it can be confusing and lead to accidents. If signs are not visible due to poor lighting or obstructions, cyclists may not be aware of the rules or hazards ahead, increasing the risk of accidents. The case of Fox v. City of New York focuses on the importance of proper signage in ensuring the safety of cyclists on New York City streets.

Background

The plaintiff in Fox v. City of New York was riding his bicycle on 8th Avenue in Manhattan when he was hit by a car. The accident occurred at the intersection of 8th Avenue and 56th Street. The plaintiff was traveling south on 8th Avenue in the bicycle lane when he was hit by a car that was turning left from 56th Street onto 8th Avenue. The plaintiff suffered injuries to his face and mouth, as well as a broken finger.