From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Montague v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1993
194 A.D.2d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

June 1, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On February 25, 1988, the plaintiff Chyrill Montague, an employee at Woodhull Hospital in Brooklyn, was struck and pushed in the hall of the hospital's trauma center by a prisoner-patient, Nelson Lindsay. Lindsay, who had been taken to the hospital for treatment of facial or head injuries, was attempting to escape from the custody of two armed correction officers while he had been momentarily uncuffed in order to get dressed. As a result of the incident, the plaintiff allegedly sustained personal injuries to her neck, back, and head.

The defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to establish the existence of a "special relationship" between herself and the New York City police, as agents of the defendant City, which would have created a specific duty to protect her from the dangers posed by an escaping prisoner-patient. The Supreme Court granted the motion, finding that no special relationship existed between the plaintiff and the defendant. In addition, the court ruled that the plaintiff failed to set forth facts raising a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant had acted negligently.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff has failed to establish any issue of facts establishing the existence of a special relationship between the plaintiff and the police (see, Cuffy v. City of New York, 69 N.Y.2d 255; Miller v. State of New York, 62 N.Y.2d 506, 510; Smith v. City of New York, 122 A.D.2d 133). In any event, the officer's action in briefly uncuffing the prisoner so as to permit him to dress was a discretionary function for which the City may not be held liable (see, e.g., O'Connor v. City of New York, 58 N.Y.2d 184; Smith v. City of New York, supra; Kroger v. City of Mount Vernon, 104 A.D.2d 855). Lawrence, J.P., O'Brien, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Montague v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1993
194 A.D.2d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Montague v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:CHYRILL MONTAGUE, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1993

Citations

194 A.D.2d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 314

Citing Cases

Roche v. City of N.Y.

( see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Casali v. Cyran, 84 A.D.3d 711, 921 N.Y.S.2d 879; Simpson v. Tommy Hilfiger, U.S.A.,…

Roche v. City of New York

al defendants' motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff was required to demonstrate both a reasonable…