 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PROTECTION COURT DECEDENT HUSBAND POLICE ARREST SUPRA VIOLATING SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP DEFENDANTS FAMILY COURT FAMILY COURT ACT RESIDENCE POLICE DEPARTMENT FURNITURE JUSTIFIABLE RELIANCE NY2D CUFFY YORK SUMMARY JUDGMENT WIFE APPELLATE DIVISION RESPONDENTS REPORT MOTION REASONABLENESS CITY HOUSE AFFIRMATIVE UNDERTAKING |
ANTHONY MASTROIANNI, &C., APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ET AL.,
RESPONDENTS.
91 N.Y.2d 198, 691 N.E.2d 613, 668 N.Y.S.2d 542 (1997).
December 2, 1997
2 No. 221
(Case Commentary by the Editorial Board)
(97 NY Int. 0209)
Decided December 2, 1997
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
_________________________________________________________________
Frederick Fagelson, for appellant.
Peter Mayer, for respondents.
SMITH, J.:
Plaintiff's complaint seeks damages stemming from an alleged failure
to provide plaintiff's decedent with protection after the police
department had been directly notified that decedent's husband had
violated an order of protection. We conclude that a special
relationship between the police department and the decedent arose from
the circumstances presented. We further conclude that a question of
fact has been raised concerning the department's duty of care owed to
plaintiff's decedent due to the existence of this special
relationship. Accordingly, summary judgment should not have been
granted to the defendants and the order of the Appellate Division
should be reversed.
Based on the papers submitted on defendants' motion, the record
contains the following evidentiary allegations. On June 12, 1985,
Family Court granted a petition filed under Article 10 of the Family
Court Act (n.1) by the Child Protective Agency of the Suffolk
County Department of Social Services on behalf of decedent's children
against her estranged husband. Based upon the husband's alleged
history of abuse toward his wife and her children, the court issued a
permanent order of protection pursuant to Family Court Act
842(a). The order provided that "(Anthony Swiggett) shall not have any
contact with children or Mrs. Parker (Swiggett) and he is to remain
away from their residence, to wit: 39 Pine Street, Central Islip, New
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
