$4,125,000 Settlement

When a municipality approves the redesign of a community shopping area, including the roadways surrounding that area, one of the most important components is the safety of the nearby residents and those who spend their hard-earned dollars at the new shopping center. But the responsibility of a municipality does not end when the doors of a new shopping center open. The municipality has a continuing obligation to take action to remedy any dangerous conditions that become evident. We know all too well that if something should be done for safety and is not, that it’s not a question of if someone will get hurt, but only a question of when someone will get hurt.

In this case, it was just after the summer had ended, and our client travelled with a friend by car to a local Queens County shopping center, which had a midblock entrance and exit with no crosswalk, stop sign, or traffic light. Patrons of the mall would enter and exit from that area and cross the street midblock to take their purchased items to their cars. On this particular day, our client finished his shopping and exited the mall at the midblock area. He then crossed the street to transport some of his purchased items to his friend’s car that was parked nearby. On his trip back to the mall to retrieve the balance of his purchased items, our client stepped in front of a double-parked car that was parked midblock when he was struck by a passing vehicle and sustained a significant head injury.

An action was brought against the double-parked car, the vehicle that struck our client, and the City of New York. All three defended this case vigorously. One of the primary defenses was that our client had crossed the street in the middle of the block where there was no crosswalk, stop sign, or traffic light, and was not looking in the direction of oncoming traffic when he was struck by the moving vehicle. This was attested to by an eyewitness that saw the incident as it unfolded. The double-parked car and the vehicle that struck our client both had very limited insurance policies.

After an extensive investigation into the building and development of the mall and surrounding area, our firm alleged that the City of New York had a duty and responsibility to its citizens to study and construct a midblock crosswalk in the very location where our client crossed the street and was struck by the motor vehicle. The City claimed that it did not have notice of a dangerous condition, even though it performed an unrelated study of the area some years before that revealed a hazard to pedestrians. The City further alleged that no action could be maintained against it, since a governmental entity that performs a study of a roadway, even if they don’t properly act upon the results of the study, are immune from responsibility. This is legally correct; however, our firm continued to uncover evidence that the study the City conducted years earlier was inadequate, and in fact, put the City on notice of a dangerous condition for which the City failed to act.

The trial court denied the City’s motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the case. An appeal by the City was filed with the Appellate Division. The case continued to proceed toward trial with expert exchanges and witnesses subpoenaed to court. It was just days before jury selection that the City and our firm settled the case. This settlement will not only provide our client with economic security, but it will also elevate the standard for safety throughout New York City by incentivizing the City to take a hard look at complaints about unsafe areas and to remedy those conditions before significant harm strikes another innocent New Yorker.