Miller v. Savage

9 Citing cases

  1. Thygesen v. N. Bailey Volunteer Fire Co.

    106 A.D.3d 1458 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 11 times

    We reject that contention. Pursuant to Town Law § 170, a town is authorized to establish a fire district, fire alarm district or fire protection district for the benefit of the town residents ( see Cuddy v. Town of Amsterdam, 62 A.D.2d 119, 120, 403 N.Y.S.2d 590;see also Miller v. Savage, 237 A.D.2d 695, 696, 654 N.Y.S.2d 215). A fire district is a separate legal entity whose members are employees of the fire district, not of any political subdivision ( see § 174 [7]; Nelson v. Garcia, 152 A.D.2d 22, 25, 548 N.Y.S.2d 963).

  2. Sawyer v. Town of Lewis

    2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 51751 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003)

    As with the fire department Steven W. Sullivan must also be considered under the ultimate control of the Town, and the Town by extension responsible for his actions. Courts have determined volunteer firefighters to be employees of the municipality responsible for providing the protection, whether they be a town or village, as opposed to fire department employees ( Miller v. Savage, 237 AD2d 695). Steven W. Sullivan must therefore be considered a Town of Lewis employee.

  3. Froelich v. S. Wilson Volunteer Fire Co.

    198 A.D.3d 1312 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)   Cited 2 times

    a, with no independent corporate status, for which the town board is responsible for providing for the furnishing of fire protection" ( Thygesen , 106 A.D.3d at 1459, 964 N.Y.S.2d 816 [internal quotation marks omitted]) and, "[t]o that end, [a town board] may ‘contract with any city, village, fire district or incorporated fire company ... for the furnishing of fire protection’ " ( Matter ofWaite v. Town of Champion , 31 N.Y.3d 586, 590, 81 N.Y.S.3d 807, 106 N.E.3d 1167 [2018], quoting Town Law § 184 [1] ; seeCuddy , 62 A.D.2d at 120-121, 403 N.Y.S.2d 590 ). "Members of the fire departments or companies established within a fire protection district ‘are deemed officers, employees, or appointees of the town[,] and the town is liable for any negligence on the part of such members’ " ( Thygesen , 106 A.D.3d at 1459-1460, 964 N.Y.S.2d 816, quoting Nelson , 152 A.D.2d at 24, 548 N.Y.S.2d 963 ; see General Municipal Law §§ 50-a [1] ; 50-b [1]; 205-b; Town Law § 184 [1] ; N-PCL 1402 [e] [1] ; Miller v. Savage , 237 A.D.2d 695, 696, 654 N.Y.S.2d 215 [3d Dept. 1997] ). Here, the contract between the fire company and the Town shows that the Town "duly established ... a fire protection district" and entered into a contract with the fire company to furnish fire protection within that fire protection district.

  4. Froelich v. S. Wilson Volunteer Fire Co.

    2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 5207 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021)

    geographic area, with no independent corporate status, for which the town board is responsible for providing for the furnishing of fire protection" (Thygesen, 106 A.D.3d at 1459 [internal quotation marks omitted]) and, "[t]o that end, [a town board] may 'contract with any city, village, fire district or incorporated fire company... for the furnishing of fire protection'" (Matter of Waite v Town of Champion, 31 N.Y.3d 586, 590 [2018], quoting Town Law § 184 [1]; see Cuddy, 62 A.D.2d at 120-121). "Members of the fire departments or companies established within a fire protection district 'are deemed officers, employees, or appointees of the town[, ] and the town is liable for any negligence on the part of such members'" (Thygesen, 106 A.D.3d at 1459-1460, quoting Nelson, 152 A.D.2d at 24; see General Municipal Law §§ 50-a [1]; 50-b [1]; 205-b; Town Law § 184 [1]; N-PCL 1402 [e] [1]; Miller v Savage, 237 A.D.2d 695, 696 [3d Dept 1997]). Here, the contract between the fire company and the Town shows that the Town "duly established... a fire protection district" and entered into a contract with the fire company to furnish fire protection within that fire protection district.

  5. Roberts v. Coeymans Hollow Volunteer Fire Co.

    168 A.D.3d 1144 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)   Cited 1 times
    Noting that defendant fire company "and the Fire District are separate entities" such that service of a notice of claim on former would not satisfy requirement of service on the latter

    Furthermore, when defendant's members responded to the fire at Roberts' house, they acted under the direction of the Chief of the Fire District. Because defendant and the Fire District are separate entities and defendant does not exert control over its members, defendant cannot be held liable for the alleged negligence of its members (seeThygesen v. North Bailey Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., 106 A.D.3d 1458, 1459–1460, 964 N.Y.S.2d 816 [2013] ; Miller v. Savage, 237 A.D.2d 695, 696, 654 N.Y.S.2d 215 [1997] ; Knapp v. Union Vale Fire Co., 141 A.D.2d 509, 509–510, 529 N.Y.S.2d 132 [1988] ; Cuddy v. Town of Amsterdam, 62 A.D.2d 119, 121, 403 N.Y.S.2d 590 [1978] ). We also find that Supreme Court properly denied Roberts' cross motion insofar as she sought to add the Fire District as a defendant.

  6. Sawyer v. Town of Lewis

    11 A.D.3d 938 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 2 times

    nded complaint against WLVFD, we affirm for the reasons stated in the decision of Supreme Court. With respect to WLVFD, we conclude that it is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against it, and we therefore modify the order accordingly. Plaintiffs alleged that WLVFD is responsible for the actions of Steven Sullivan. Where, as here, a firefighter is a member of an incorporated fire agency in a fire protection district, the town in which the agency is incorporated is deemed to have control over the operations of the agency ( see Not-For-Profit Corporation Law § 1402 [e] [1]). Although Sullivan was responding to a call in another town pursuant to a contract between WLVFD and that town, the Town of Lewis maintained exclusive control over WLVFD because WLVFD maintained its apparatus in the Town of Lewis ( see § 1402 [e] [2]). Because WLVFD had no control over Sullivan, it is not a proper party to this lawsuit, which is based on Sullivan's alleged negligence ( see Miller v. Savage, 237 AD2d 695, 696; Haskell v. Chautauqua County Fireman's Fraternity, 184 AD2d 12, 17, lv dismissed 81 NY2d 954). We note that the Town of Ava served a notice of cross appeal but has failed to brief any issues with respect thereto, and thus we deem the cross appeal abandoned and dismissed ( see 22 NYCRR 1000.12 [b]).

  7. Opn. No. 2002-14

    Opn. No. 2002-14 (Ops. N.Y. Atty. Gen. Sep. 19, 2002)

    Furthermore, General Municipal Law § 716(13) demonstrates that a fire district's boundaries, if they follow a town's boundaries at the fire district's inception, do not necessarily continue to do so whenever the town's boundaries change. We note that a fire district is, in its own right, a political subdivision of the State, see Town Law § 174(7), and, thus, independent of the town or towns that created it. SeeMiller v. Savage, 237 A.D.2d 695, 696 (3d Dep't 1997); Fallicav. Town of Brookhaven, 69 A.D.2d 579, 585 n. 1 (2d Dep't 1979). While the consequences of annexation by cities for boundaries of fire districts is different, see General Municipal Law § 716 (11), that is not dispositive here in light of the clear evidence that fire district boundaries do not automatically change following changes in town boundaries.

  8. Thygesen v. N. Bailey Volunteer Fire Co.

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 34292 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011)

    Members of a "fire protection district" are deemed officers, employees or appointees of the town, and the town is liable for any negligence on the part of such members. See, Sawyer v. Town of Lewis, 2003 N.Y. Slip. Op. 51751U, 5 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003); see also, Miller v. Savage, 237 A.D.2d 695 (3d Dept. 1997); Haskell v. Chautauqua County Fireman's Fraternity, Inc., 184 A.D.2d 12 (4th Dept. 1992). Therefore, the defendants argue that even if the court were to accept that plaintiff's volunteer fire fighter status made him a "employee" sufficient to state a claim under the HRL, he would be considered an employee of the Town, as opposed to North Bailey.

  9. In Matter of Hook v. Dinapoli

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 33501 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2008)

    . . . Therefore, as the Company argues, the above-cited subdivision of section 1402 provides that a Town, such as the Town of North Hempstead, has control over a fire company such as the one at issue here (see Sawyer v Town of Lewis, 11 AD3d 938, 940 [4th Dept 2004]; Miller v Savage, 237 AD2d 695, 696 [3d Dept 1997]; see also Miller v Morania Oil, OCP, 194 AD2d 770, 771 [2d Dpt 1993]). Since section 1402 was enacted by the legislature of the state, arguably a Town derives its power of control over a fire company, such as the Company here, from the legislature.