From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zulli v. Halleran

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1993
198 A.D.2d 347 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Summary

In Zulli, plaintiff tow truck operator was injured when he was struck by a vehicle while removing debris from the scene of an accident which occurred 45 minutes earlier.

Summary of this case from Rozz v. Village Auto Body Works Inc.

Opinion

November 15, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is granted, and the cross claims of Joseph R. Halleran and the County of Nassau against the appellants are dismissed.

The plaintiff in this case, a tow truck operator, was injured when he was struck by a car being driven by the defendant Joseph R. Halleran. The plaintiff had responded to the scene of an accident which had occurred approximately 45 minutes earlier in which two cars being driven, respectively, by the defendants Josephine Tassinari and Anthony M. Piscopo and owned, respectively, by the defendants Charles Tassinari and Morris A. Piscopo collided. At the time that the plaintiff was injured, he was removing debris from the scene of that accident and the defendants Josephine Tassinari and Anthony Piscopo were no longer at the scene. Thereafter, the plaintiff discontinued his negligence causes of action against the drivers and owners of the Tassinari and Piscopo cars. Nevertheless, despite this discontinuance, the defendants Halleran and the County of Nassau, who had also been sued by the plaintiff on the theory that the Nassau County Police Department had not properly secured the scene of the first accident, refused to discontinue their cross claims against the Tassinari and Piscopo defendants. Accordingly, the appellants moved for summary judgment dismissing those cross claims insofar as asserted against them. The trial court denied their motion, and this appeal ensued. We reverse.

The court erred by failing to dismiss all cross claims asserted against the Piscopos. The first accident in which they were involved had occurred approximately 45 minutes earlier, and was not a proximate or legal cause of the plaintiff's injuries, but merely furnished the condition for the event's occurrence (see, Moss v New York Tel. Co., 196 A.D.2d 492; Hallet v Akintola, 178 A.D.2d 744; Southwell v Riverdale Tr. Corp., 149 A.D.2d 385). Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, Lawrence, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Zulli v. Halleran

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1993
198 A.D.2d 347 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

In Zulli, plaintiff tow truck operator was injured when he was struck by a vehicle while removing debris from the scene of an accident which occurred 45 minutes earlier.

Summary of this case from Rozz v. Village Auto Body Works Inc.
Case details for

Zulli v. Halleran

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN ZULLI, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH R. HALLERAN et al., Respondents, and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 15, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 347 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
603 N.Y.S.2d 878

Citing Cases

Rozz v. Village Auto Body Works Inc.

There is no reported case involving Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1219 (c) and the purported negligence of a tow…

Rozz v. Vill. Auto Body Works, Inc.

Here, plaintiff premised his claims against defendant on defendant's allegedly having left debris from the…