From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vazquez v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 25, 1997
236 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

February 25, 1997.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered on or about August 28, 1996, which dismissed the third-party action against the City of New York and any other claim asserted against the City, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.


Since the third-party complaint never alleged that the City had notice of a supposedly dangerous traffic condition at the accident site, namely, the protrusion of trailers from a loading dock on to the public roadway, the City was not under any obligation to implement a plan to change traffic conditions at that site ( see, Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 283-284). To the extent that third-party plaintiff is arguing that the City, as owner of the loading dock facility, was at fault for designing the docks such that trailers would be positioned perpendicularly and protruding on to the street, the IAS Court properly noted that the City "has no involvement in directing operations at the [facility] nor directing how vehicles park within the confines of the market". Finally, we note that although third-party plaintiff alleged that the City was negligent in failing to set out "warning, signs or signals", it never explained how the absence of such devices could have been a substantial cause of the collision that occurred here, given that plaintiff driver claims to have been unable to see the 40 foot long protruding trailer involved in the accident at issue ( see, Frank v City of New York, 163 AD2d 254).


Summaries of

Vazquez v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 25, 1997
236 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Vazquez v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MANUEL VAZQUEZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. SEA-LAND SERVICE, INC., Defendant…

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

Date published: Feb 25, 1997

Citations

236 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
654 N.Y.S.2d 15

Citing Cases

Felix Rios v. Gristedes Delivery Ser

y act or omission of the defendant was a proximate cause thereof is one for the court and not for the jury" (…

Cannistra v. McCullough, Goldberger & Staudt

The Supreme Court erred, however, in denying those branches of the respective motions which were to dismiss…