Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Schwartz v. New York State Thruway Authority 61 N.Y.2d 955

← Cases

Schwartz v. New York State Thruway Authority

61 N.Y.2d 955 Court N.Y. Decision date 1984-03-22 Docket Claim No. 62817 English

Contents

Majority

p. 955
Jeffrey Schwartz, Appellant, v New York State Thruway Authority, Respondent.
(Claim No. 62817.)
Argued February 23, 1984;
decided March 22, 1984
p. 956
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Richard J. Madison for appellant.
Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (.Michael S. Buskus and Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The guiderail that was installed met the relevant design standards in effect at the time of its construction. Claimant asserts that it should have been extended an additional 11

p. 957
feet. This was a planning decision which, if made, would only have involved giving “ ‘the public more complete protection’ ” (Weiss v Fote, 7 NY2d 579 , 584). Consequently, liability will not be imposed upon the Authority for failing to build a longer guiderail.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cases cited