From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rashed v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 7, 1996
232 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

October 7, 1996.

In a negligence claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the claimant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Mega, J.), dated June 26, 1995, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim.

Before: Joy, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The claimant was injured when he was stabbed by an unknown assailant with a knife during a "rap" concert at the York College campus of the City University of New York. "When the State assumes a dual role, acting in both its proprietary and governmental capacities, it is the specific act or omission out of which the injury is claimed to have arisen and the capacity in which that act or failure to act occurred which governs liability, not whether the agency involved is generally engaged in proprietary activity or is in control of the location where the injury occurred" ( Laura O. v State of New York, 202 AD2d 559, 560; see, Weiner v Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 55 NY2d 175, 182).

In the present case, the record supports a finding that the State was acting in its governmental capacity, since the campus security personnel engaged in certain security measures, to which all members of the general public were subjected before they could enter the campus facility for the concert. The purpose of the security measures, which included requiring all members of the public to pass through a metal detector and be subjected to a "pat down", was to prevent individuals from entering the facility with weapons.

Since the specific failure to act of which the State is accused is the failure to provide adequate security for the claimant while in the campus facility, a governmental function, no liability arises from the performance of such a function absent a showing of a special duty of protection ( see, Bonner v City of New York, 73 NY2d 930, 932; see also, Marilyn S. v City of New York, 73 NY2d 910, affg 134 AD2d 583, 585 for reasons stated at App Div; Vitale v City of New York, 60 NY2d 861; Laura O. v State of New York, supra, 202 AD2d, at 560). There is no evidence in the record that the State owed the claimant a special duty of protection upon which he relied. Thus, the record fails to establish any legal basis for judgment in the claimant's favor.

The claimant's remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

Rashed v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 7, 1996
232 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Rashed v. State

Case Details

Full title:NAFIS RASHED, Appellant, v. STATE OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Oct 7, 1996

Citations

232 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
648 N.Y.S.2d 131

Citing Cases

Varghese v. Sewanhaka Central High S. Dist

However, the plaintiffs did not establish that the respondents owed them any special duty of protection.…

Torres v. State

The court concludes that the police function of administering security measures, such as screening all…