10 New York opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Nelson v. Nygrengreen2 sentences2017Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, we conclude that the court properly denied that part of their motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the affirmative defense of culpable conduct to the extent that defendants allege that plaintiffs’ damages should be diminished based on plaintiff’s breach of an independent common-law duty to exercise reasonable care for his own safety (see Nelson v Nygren, 259 NY 71, 75 [1932]; see generally PJI 2:87), by opting to ride in a motor vehicle without a seatbelt available for his use. 2017Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, we conclude that the court properly denied that part of their motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the affirmative defense of culpable conduct to the extent that defendants allege that plaintiffs’ damages should be diminished based on plaintiff’s breach of an independent common-law duty to exercise reasonable care for his own safety (see Nelson v Nygren, 259 NY 71, 75 [1932]; see generally PJI 2:87), by opting to ride in a motor vehicle without a seatbelt available for his use. | 3 | 4 |
Spier v. Barkergreen2 sentences2018Indeed, the seatbelt defense does not concern any comparative fault issues, since "[a] plaintiff's alleged failure to wear a seatbelt is not relevant to the issue of liability but, rather, may, if properly pleaded as an affirmative defense, be introduced into evidence in mitigation of damages'" ( Brabham v City of New York , 105 AD3d 881, 883 , quoting Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1229-c[8]; see Spier v Barker , 35 NY2d at 450 ). 1984There can be no surprise to the plaintiff in the assertion of a seatbelt defense, which is relevant only to the question of damages (see Spier v Barker, 35 NY2d 444 ). | 1 | 2 |
People v. Ramirez-Portorealgreen1 sentence2021Although Trooper Shive could ordinarily rely on Investigator Backer’s information about the alleged seatbelt violation to pull Mr. Blandford over (People v Ramirez-Portoreal, 88 NY2d 99, 113 [1996]; People v Horowitz, 21 NY2d 55, 60 [1967]), Mr. Blandford parked and exited his car before Trooper Shive arrived. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Horowitzgreen1 sentence2021Although Trooper Shive could ordinarily rely on Investigator Backer’s information about the alleged seatbelt violation to pull Mr. Blandford over (People v Ramirez-Portoreal, 88 NY2d 99, 113 [1996]; People v Horowitz, 21 NY2d 55, 60 [1967]), Mr. Blandford parked and exited his car before Trooper Shive arrived. | 1 | 1 |
Hernandez v. Vavragreen1 sentence2015The damages award to Coleman for Dunnigan’s past pain and suffering for head and other injuries, encompassing a period of two years and 11 months, even as reduced, deviates from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances, given her age and health at the time of the accident (see CPLR 5501 [c]; Singh v Gladys Towncars Inc., 42 AD3d 313 [1st Dept 2007]; Hernandez v Vavra, 62 AD3d 616, 617 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 714 [2009]). | 1 | 1 |
Banks v. City of New Yorkgreen1 sentence2015We also see no reason to disturb the trial court’s exercise of discretion in precluding testimony regarding a seatbelt defense (cf. Banks, 92 AD3d at 591 [even though economist’s report was exchanged on eve of trial, this Court refused to disturb Supreme Court’s exercise of discretion permitting economist’s testimony regarding lost wages, which was pleaded in the bill of particulars]). | 1 | 1 |
Hamilton v. Pursergreen1 sentence2004We are also in agreement with Supreme Court’s view that defendant’s failure to wear a seatbelt in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1229-c cannot be considered as the basis of plaintiffs claim of negligence (see Baker v Keller, 241 AD2d 947, 947 [1997]; Hamilton v Purser, 162 AD2d 91, 92 [1990]). | 1 | 1 |
Baker v. Kellergreen1 sentence2004We are also in agreement with Supreme Court’s view that defendant’s failure to wear a seatbelt in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1229-c cannot be considered as the basis of plaintiffs claim of negligence (see Baker v Keller, 241 AD2d 947, 947 [1997]; Hamilton v Purser, 162 AD2d 91, 92 [1990]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mullen v. Zoebe, Inc.
green
1 sentence2018In this regard, we find unpersuasive the plaintiffs' further contention that the seatbelt defense may not be advanced in opposition to their cause of action pursuant to General Municipal Law § 205-e because the issue of comparative fault is not to be considered with respect to such a cause of action ( see Giuffrida v Citibank Corp ., 100 NY2d 72, 83 ; Mullen v Zoebe, Inc. , 86 NY2d 135, 142-144 ; Williams v City of New York , 304 AD2d 562, 568 , affd 2 NY3d 352 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Giuffrida v. Citibank Corp.
green
1 sentence2018In this regard, we find unpersuasive the plaintiffs' further contention that the seatbelt defense may not be advanced in opposition to their cause of action pursuant to General Municipal Law § 205-e because the issue of comparative fault is not to be considered with respect to such a cause of action ( see Giuffrida v Citibank Corp ., 100 NY2d 72, 83 ; Mullen v Zoebe, Inc. , 86 NY2d 135, 142-144 ; Williams v City of New York , 304 AD2d 562, 568 , affd 2 NY3d 352 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Gardner v. Honda Motor Co.
green
1 sentence2018Co. , 195 AD2d 981 ; see also Spier v Barker , 35 NY2d 444, 450 ; Gardner v Honda Motor Co. , 145 AD2d 41, 47 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Brabham v. City of New York
green
2 sentences2018Indeed, the seatbelt defense does not concern any comparative fault issues, since "[a] plaintiff's alleged failure to wear a seatbelt is not relevant to the issue of liability but, rather, may, if properly pleaded as an affirmative defense, be introduced into evidence in mitigation of damages'" ( Brabham v City of New York , 105 AD3d 881, 883 , quoting Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1229-c[8]; see Spier v Barker , 35 NY2d at 450 ). 2018Indeed, the seatbelt defense does not concern any comparative fault issues, since "[a] plaintiff's alleged failure to wear a seatbelt is not relevant to the issue of liability but, rather, may, if properly pleaded as an affirmative defense, be introduced into evidence in mitigation of damages'" ( Brabham v City of New York , 105 AD3d 881, 883 , quoting Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1229-c[8]; see Spier v Barker , 35 NY2d at 450 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Williams v. City of New York
green
1 sentence2018In this regard, we find unpersuasive the plaintiffs' further contention that the seatbelt defense may not be advanced in opposition to their cause of action pursuant to General Municipal Law § 205-e because the issue of comparative fault is not to be considered with respect to such a cause of action ( see Giuffrida v Citibank Corp ., 100 NY2d 72, 83 ; Mullen v Zoebe, Inc. , 86 NY2d 135, 142-144 ; Williams v City of New York , 304 AD2d 562, 568 , affd 2 NY3d 352 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hollenbeck v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
green
1 sentence2018Co. , 195 AD2d 981 ; see also Spier v Barker , 35 NY2d 444, 450 ; Gardner v Honda Motor Co. , 145 AD2d 41, 47 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Williams v. City of New York
green
1 sentence2018In this regard, we find unpersuasive the plaintiffs' further contention that the seatbelt defense may not be advanced in opposition to their cause of action pursuant to General Municipal Law § 205-e because the issue of comparative fault is not to be considered with respect to such a cause of action ( see Giuffrida v Citibank Corp ., 100 NY2d 72, 83 ; Mullen v Zoebe, Inc. , 86 NY2d 135, 142-144 ; Williams v City of New York , 304 AD2d 562, 568 , affd 2 NY3d 352 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Matter of Alejandro
neutral
1 sentence2015The damages award to Coleman for Dunnigan’s past pain and suffering for head and other injuries, encompassing a period of two years and 11 months, even as reduced, deviates from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances, given her age and health at the time of the accident (see CPLR 5501 [c]; Singh v Gladys Towncars Inc., 42 AD3d 313 [1st Dept 2007]; Hernandez v Vavra, 62 AD3d 616, 617 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 714 [2009]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Singh v. Gladys Towncars Inc.
green
1 sentence2015The damages award to Coleman for Dunnigan’s past pain and suffering for head and other injuries, encompassing a period of two years and 11 months, even as reduced, deviates from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances, given her age and health at the time of the accident (see CPLR 5501 [c]; Singh v Gladys Towncars Inc., 42 AD3d 313 [1st Dept 2007]; Hernandez v Vavra, 62 AD3d 616, 617 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 714 [2009]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Alexander
green
1 sentence1994Aside from the information to be garnered from the subject’s license, registration and insurance card (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 401 [4]) and a subsequent routine license and registration check, we are at a loss as to any relevant area of inquiry (see, People v Alexander, 189 AD2d 189, 194-195 ). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Wardlaw v. Ford Marketing Corp.
neutral
1 sentence1984There is also no prejudice to the plaintiff and the defendants’ motion should have been granted (see Seip v Esposito, 78 AD2d 850 ; Karras v County of Westchester, 71 AD2d 878 ; Wardlaw v Ford Marketing Corp., 53 AD2d 610 ). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Karras v. County of Westchester
neutral
1 sentence1984There is also no prejudice to the plaintiff and the defendants’ motion should have been granted (see Seip v Esposito, 78 AD2d 850 ; Karras v County of Westchester, 71 AD2d 878 ; Wardlaw v Ford Marketing Corp., 53 AD2d 610 ). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Sand v. Lykes Bros. Steamship Co.
neutral
1 sentence1984There is also no prejudice to the plaintiff and the defendants’ motion should have been granted (see Seip v Esposito, 78 AD2d 850 ; Karras v County of Westchester, 71 AD2d 878 ; Wardlaw v Ford Marketing Corp., 53 AD2d 610 ). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.