From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Charles v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 3, 2000
272 A.D.2d 287 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued March 14, 2000.

May 3, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants City of New York and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York, and the defendant St. Christopher-Ottilie, separately appeal, as limited by their respective briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Weiss, J.), dated April 28, 1999, as denied those branches of their respective motions which were for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for negligent placement, supervision, and training of the defendant foster parent insofar as asserted against them.

Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Leonard Koerner and Kristin M. Helmers of counsel), for appellants City of New York and Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York.

Murphy Higgins, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Dan Schiavetta of counsel), for appellant St. Christopher-Ottilie.

Gorayeb Associates, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Mark J. Elder of counsel), for respondents.

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., DAVID S. RITTER, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs payable to the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs, those branches of the respective motions which were for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for negligent placement, supervision, and training of the defendant foster parent insofar as asserted against them are granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellants, and the action against the defendant foster parent is severed.

A foster care agency cannot be held liable for injuries which result to a foster child due to the momentary inattention of a foster parent, where, as here, the actions of the foster parent "were not acts that should have been foreseeable by the [agency] in the exercise of reasonable care" (Parker v. St. Christopher `s Home, 77 A.D.2d 921; cf., Bartels v. County of Westchester, 76 A.D.2d 517).

BRACKEN, J.P., RITTER, KRAUSMAN and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Charles v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 3, 2000
272 A.D.2d 287 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Charles v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:BOBBY REYNOLD CHARLES, ETC., et al., respondents, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et…

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

Date published: May 3, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 287 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
707 N.Y.S.2d 899

Citing Cases

Ogletree v. Rush Realty Associates, LLC

perty and whether the appellant's alleged negligence was a proximate cause of the injuries sustained by the…

McCabe v. Dutchess County

"[i]n order to find that a child care agency breached its duty to adequately supervise the children entrusted…