Robert S. Kelner and Gail S. KelnerNew York’s zone of danger rule, which imposes liability for the infliction of emotional distress arising from the observation of harm to a third person, has always been a strained doctrine under New York law. Until the very recent decision of the Court of Appeals in Green v. Espalanade Venture Partnership, 2021 NY Slip Op 01092 (Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2021), the “zone-of danger” rule articulated by the Court of Appeals in Bovsun v. Sanperi, 61 N.Y.2d 219 (1984) has been the controlling decisional law in New York. Bovsun permits a cause of action to be brought for damages arising from the negligent infliction of emotional distress to a bystander who is in the “zone of danger” when an immediate family member (as strictly defined) is injured or killed. It is a cause of action which must be separately pleaded and charged to the jury at the time of trial. Bovsun requires a claimant to be within the zone of potential injury and to be a witness to the infliction of injury to an “immediate” family member.
In Greene, the Court of Appeals added grandparents to those family members who may recover under zone of danger principles. However, to read Greene only for this narrow result would be doing a great disservice to a decision which, through a majority decision written by Judge Fahey and two separate concurring decisions, by Judges Rivera and Garcia, represents a monumental and sweeping examination of evolving familial relationships and the common law principles touched upon by this cause of action.
"danger" - Google News
March 22, 2021 at 09:30PM
https://ift.tt/3vQXCzG
'Greene': The Evolution of Zone of Danger | New York Law Journal - Law.com
"danger" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3bVUlF0
https://ift.tt/3f9EULr
No comments:
Post a Comment