Opinion
December 23, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Rosenbloom, J.
Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Green, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Special Term properly denied the city's motion for summary judgment. Since the arrest warrant was ambiguous on its face, the police were required to use due diligence and reasonable care to verify whether plaintiff was in fact the person intended to be arrested and the only person to whom the warrant could validly be applied (see, Dennis v State of New York, 96 A.D.2d 1143; Williams v City of Buffalo, 72 A.D.2d 952, 953, appeal dismissed 49 N.Y.2d 799; Craner v Corbett, 27 A.D.2d 796; Maracle v State of New York, 50 Misc.2d 348; cf., Davis v City of Syracuse, 66 N.Y.2d 840). On this record, the determination of due diligence is a question of fact.