Source: https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/2014/01/injured-police-officer-sues-persons.html
Timestamp: 2017-10-21 17:44:33
Document Index: 34596685

Matched Legal Cases: ['§205', '§205', '§205', '§205', '§205', '§ 1104']

New York Public Personnel Law: Injured police officer sues persons alleged to have caused her injury pursuant to General Municipal Law §205-e
Injured police officer sues persons alleged to have caused her injury pursuant to General Municipal Law §205-e
2014 NY Slip Op 00077, Appellate Division, First Department
A New York City police officer alleged she was injured in a motor vehicle accident while she was a passenger in an unmarked police car that was being driven by another New York City police officer. She sued under color of General Municipal Law §205-e.
Essentially §205-e of the General Municipal Law gives certain injured police officers the right to sue the person or persons alleged to be guilty of “causing any accident, causing injury, death or a disease which results in death, that occurs directly or indirectly as a result of any neglect, omission, willful or culpable negligence” because of the person’s or persons’ failing to comply with the relevant of any law, rule or regulation. The person or persons guilty of said neglect, omission, willful or culpable negligence at the time of such injury is liable to pay damages to the injured officer.
Supreme Court, New York County*denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the General Municipal Law §205-e claims predicated upon their alleged violation of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s ruling.
According to the Appellate Division’s decision, the injured officer testified that the officer driving the unmarked vehicle had double-parked the vehicle in order to observe two suspects and that they were sitting at the accident location approximately 15 to 20 minutes before they were struck from behind by a codefendants' minivan.
In addition, said the court, the police officer driving the vehicle had testified that he had double-parked the police vehicle in order to investigate a suspect, which is not an "emergency operation" as defined by Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104(a).
* The Supreme Court’s decision, setting out the fact in this action, is posted on the Internet at http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/pdfs/2012/2012_32185.pdf
http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2014/2014_00077.htm