Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Ast v. State 66 N.Y.2d 998

← Cases

Ast v. State

66 N.Y.2d 998 Court N.Y. Decision date 1985-12-19 Docket Claim No. 64247 English

Contents

Majority

p. 998
Albert W. Ast et al., Respondents, v State of New York, Appellant.
(Claim No. 64247.)
Argued November 13, 1985;
decided December 19, 1985
p. 1000
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Michael S. Buskus, Robert Hermann and Peter H Schiff of counsel), for appellant.
Sheldon Hurwitz and Paul J. Suozzi for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

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

State Police urgently invoking the assistance of a Thruway toll collector to stop a fleeing vehicle owe a duty of due care to assure that compliance with their request does not expose the individual to a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm (see, Thain v City of New York, 35 AD2d 545 , affd 30 NY2d 524 ; Schuster v City of New York, 5 NY2d 75 , 81, 84; Lubelfeld v City of New York, 4 NY2d 455 ). The affirmed findings, supported by the record, that this duty was breached and that such breach was a proximate cause of injury are beyond our review (Humphrey v State of New York, 60 NY2d 742 ).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cases cited