[DOWNLOAD] "Debra A. James v. Liberty Lines" by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Debra A. James v. Liberty Lines
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 07, 1983
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 59 KB
Description
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries due to negligence, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cerrato, J.), entered June 24, 1983, which denied its motion to dismiss the action for failure to serve a notice of claim. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, motion granted, and action dismissed. In Coleman v Westchester St. Transp. Co. (57 N.Y.2d 734), the Court of Appeals held that Westchester Countys statutory duty to operate a transit system (Local Laws, 1969, No. 8 of Westchester County; Local Laws, 1970, No. 11 of Westchester County) imposed upon the county an obligation to indemnify contractual carriers for any damages recovered against them (General Municipal Law, § 50-b, subd 1), and, therefore, a notice of claim must be served as a condition precedent to suit (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd 1, par [b]). While plaintiff has not complied with this notice of claim requirement and the time to make application for late service has expired, the Supreme Court held that Coleman (supra) was to be given only prospective application. We reverse. Absent a sharp break in the web of the law, all cases on direct appeal must be decided in accordance with any principles newly enunciated by the Court of Appeals (e.g., Gurnee v Aetna Life & Cas. Co., 55 N.Y.2d 184, 191, cert den U.S. , 103 S Ct 83; Gager v White, 53 N.Y.2d 475, 483, cert den sub nom. Guertin Co. v Cachat, 454 U.S. 1086; People v Pepper, 53 N.Y.2d 213, 219-220, cert den 454 U.S. 967; Sears Roebuck & Co. v 9 Ave.-31 St. Corp., 274 NY 388, 401; cf. Kalman v Neuman, 80 A.D.2d 116). We fail to perceive how Coleman (supra) represented such a sharp break with the past. It overruled no prior Court of Appeals precedents and merely presented that court with its first opportunity to construe the applicable statutory provisions (cf. Gurnee v Aetna Life & Cas. Co., supra, p [97 A.D.2d 749 Page 750192]