From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burbach v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 1993
194 A.D.2d 391 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

June 10, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Eugene L. Nardelli, J.).


Plaintiff, a passenger injured in an accident involving a licensed taxicab driver with numerous violations which might have supported revocation of his license by the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission prior to the accident, seeks damages for defendants' failure to enforce their own rules and regulations. However, absent a special relationship creating a municipal duty to exercise care for the benefit of a particular class of individuals, no liability may be imposed upon a municipality for failure to enforce a statute or regulation (Sanchez v. Village of Liberty, 42 N.Y.2d 876; cf., Cuffy v. City of New York, 69 N.Y.2d 255, 260). Ordinances requiring the licensing of the taxicab industry are enacted for the benefit of the general public, not for the benefit of a limited class of persons (Bell v. Perrino, 112 A.D.2d 124, 125, affd 67 N.Y.2d 751).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

Burbach v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 1993
194 A.D.2d 391 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Burbach v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA BURBACH, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 10, 1993

Citations

194 A.D.2d 391 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 516

Citing Cases

Vill. Taxi Corp. v. Beltre

But where the statute looks beyond the question of revenue and has for its purpose the protection of public…

Vill. Taxi Corp. v. Beltre

But where the statute looks beyond the question of revenue and has for its purpose the protection of public…