From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brofsky v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 15, 1991
172 A.D.2d 640 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 15, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The appellants moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiffs common-law negligence action was barred by the so-called "fireman's rule" (see, Santangelo v. State of New York, 71 N.Y.2d 393). The plaintiff, a New York City police officer, was allegedly injured when he stepped into a pothole on a public street. We find that the appellants' motions were properly denied as the traffic condition which necessitated the officer's services at that location was sufficiently separate and apart from the alleged negligent acts which caused his injuries (see, Murphy v. Creative Foods Corp., 170 A.D.2d 441; Janeczko v Duhl, 166 A.D.2d 257; Starkey v. Trancamp Contr. Corp., 152 A.D.2d 358; Burnside v. City of New York, 144 Misc.2d 183). Thompson, J.P., Brown, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Brofsky v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 15, 1991
172 A.D.2d 640 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Brofsky v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:CARY BROFSKY, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Defendants, and…

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

Date published: Apr 15, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 640 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
568 N.Y.S.2d 440

Citing Cases

Iaccarino v. Welland Estates, Ltd.

Police officers are not precluded from recovering damages in all cases where they are injured in the line of…