Litchauer v. Town of Yorktown

1 Citing case

  1. Valdez v. City of New York

    74 A.D.3d 76 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)   Cited 21 times
    In Valdez v City of New York (74 AD3d 76, 78), this Court stated that "both McLean and Dinardo support the position that the starting point of any analysis as to governmental liability is whether a special relationship existed; and not whether the governmental action is ministerial or discretionary."

    Conversely, where the undertaking is based on a verbal assurance of protection but there is no visible police action thereafter, courts have followed Cuffy, and found that no special relationship exists. ( see Finch v County of Saratoga, 305 AD2d at 772 [plaintiff told by police: "deputy would be there within the hour"]; Clark v Town of Ticonderoga, 291 AD2d at 598 [plaintiff told by police: "we will keep an eye on you"]; Litchauer v Town of Yorktown, 134 AD2d 575 [2d Dept 1987] [no evidence of any police conduct].) In this case, there was no visible police conduct or action of any type after Torres assured the plaintiff that he was going to arrest Perez. There was no police patrol or police officer dispatched (or even promised) to the plaintiff for her protection pending the arrest.