From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schekter v. Long Island Lighting Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 8, 1988
137 A.D.2d 591 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

February 8, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Wager, J.).


Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

It is well settled that "there can be no cause of action against a fire department for alleged negligence in the methods it uses to fight a fire, absent the assumption of a special duty" (Harland Enters. v Commander Oil Corp., 97 A.D.2d 785, affd 64 N.Y.2d 708). We agree with the Supreme Court that the allegations in the original and in the proposed amended complaint, if proven, would not establish that the defendant fire companies assumed any special duty towards the plaintiffs (see, Vogel v Liberty Fuel Corp., 52 A.D.2d 667, 668). Therefore, the plaintiffs' original complaint as against the defendant fire companies was properly dismissed and that branch of the plaintiffs' cross motion which was for leave to amend the complaint was properly denied. Lawrence, J.P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schekter v. Long Island Lighting Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 8, 1988
137 A.D.2d 591 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Schekter v. Long Island Lighting Company

Case Details

Full title:LEON SCHEKTER et al., Appellants, v. LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY…

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

Date published: Feb 8, 1988

Citations

137 A.D.2d 591 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Schekter v. Long Is. Light. Co.

Decided May 3, 1988 Appeal from (2d dept: 137 A.D.2d 591) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO…

Atl. Elecs., Inc. v. Ctr. Moriches Fire Dist.

In addition, there is an exception to the general rule that a fire district or other public entity is immune…