Smith v. ABC Realty Co.
Janet Smith v. ABC Realty Co.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
The defendant’s negligence was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries (Tirado v. Lubarsky, 49 Misc 2d 543 , affd. 52 Misc 2d 527 ; Levin v. Eleto Realty Corp., 160 Misc. 141 ; Grant v. Godfrey Nurse Houses, 136 N. Y. S. 2d 751; Cardona v. Barbat, 56 N. Y. S. 2d 451; Horney v. World Is. Estates, 20 A D 2d 849, affd. 15 N Y 2d 564, cert. den. 380 U. S. 987 ). It has been repeatedly observed that “ The act of a party sought to be charged is not to be regarded as a proximate cause unless it is in clear sequence with the result and unless it could have been reasonably anticipated that the consequences complained of would result from the alleged wrongful act ” (Saugerties Bank v. Delaware & Hudson Co., 236 N. Y. 425, 430 ; Dunn *385 v. State of New York, 29 N Y 2d 313, 318). The circumstances presented in the instant record do not warrant such conclusion.
The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs and complaint dismissed.
Concurrence
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
.Markowitz, J. P.
(concurring). The circumstances leading to plaintiff’s injuries shown by her testimony and the police record did not justify a finding that defendant should have reasonably anticipated that the consequences complained of by plaintiff would result from defendant’s negligent act (Dunn v. State of New York, 29 N Y 2d 313, 318; Cartee v. Saks Fifth Ave., 277 App. Div. 606 , 609-610, affd. 303 N. Y. 832 ; Tirado v. Lubarsky, 49 Misc 2d 543 , affd. 52 Misc 2d 527 ; Levin v. Eleto Realty Corp., 160 Misc. 141 , revg. 157 Misc. 180 ; see, also, McLeod v. Grant County School Dist. No. 128, 42 Wn. 2d 316 ; Saugerties Bank v. Delaware and Hudson Co., 236 N. Y. 425, 430 ; Luce v. Hartman, 6 N Y 2d 786).
In this posture of the record, I concur in the result reached by this court.
Street and Lupia wo, JJ., concur in Per Curiam opinion; Markowitz, J. P., concurs in memorandum.
Judgment reversed, etc.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.