X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
New York City is not liable for an accident that occurred after a police officer instructed a 19-year-old without a driver’s license to move her mother’s car from an illegal parking spot, an appellate court has ruled. The ruling from the Appellate Division, Second Department, overturned a jury that found the city 75 percent liable for a $10 million award to a pedestrian who was hit by the car. The officer, Frances Knowles, did not know that the 19-year-old, Maithe Mero, did not have a driver’s license when he motioned to her to move the car from a no-standing spot on Jamaica Avenue in Queens. The teen, who had been sitting in the passenger seat of the car while her mother, Carmela E. Mero, went to a fish market, allegedly felt compelled to respond to the officer’s gesture. When the teen turned the corner, she lost control of the car and ran onto the sidewalk, hitting Deodat Persaud. Ms. Persaud had to have her right leg amputated below the knee and sustained other injuries. Ms. Persaud’s initial suit over the 1994 accident was summarily dismissed, but on appeal the Second Department found there was a triable issue of fact as to whether Officer Knowles was negligent in failing to ask the teen whether she was able to drive. At trial, an expert for Ms. Persaud testified that the officer’s actions � specifically, motioning someone sitting in a passenger seat to move a vehicle � deviated from standard police practice. The jury returned a $10 million verdict. In its second look at the case, though, the Second Department said this week that the expert’s testimony was speculative and unsupported by the evidence at trial. “The expert’s opinion was overwhelmingly contradicted at trial by the evidence adduced by the municipal defendants and by the training materials relied upon by the . . . expert himself,” the court wrote in Persaud v. City of New York, 2001-08217. The court also found the $10 million verdict excessive, and ordered a new trial on damages unless Ms. Persaud consented to a judgment of $5 million against only Ms. Mero and her daughter. Leonard Koerner, chief of the appeals division at the Corporation Counsel’s Office, said the ruling emphasizes that if a police officer acts reasonably, the city cannot be held liable. “It at least shows that there is a rule of reason,” Mr. Koerner said. Harris Zakarin of Rivkin Radler argued the appeal for Ms. Persaud. A spokeswoman for the firm said the decision was being reviewed. Justices Sondra Miller, Robert W. Schmidt, Sandra L. Townes and Stephen G. Crane concurred on the ruling.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.