Legal Opinion
Danielenko v. Kinney Rent a Car, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 5, 1982PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Murphy, P.J.
Both the operative facts of this appeal and the broad *160legal principles governing the negligence area are fairly stated in the dissenting opinion. However, viewing the evidence most favorably to the individual plaintiffs, we find that Kinney had a duty to use reasonable care to prevent the placement of the bomb. We also find that that risk of danger was foreseeable. For these reasons, we would affirm.
Kinney, as the lessor-bailor of the automobile, was obligated to use reasonable care to ensure that, at the time of the letting, it was free from defects or…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Pulka v. EdelmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Johnson v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Saugerties Bank v. . Delaware Hudson Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Greene v. Sibley, Lindsay & Curr Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Danielenko v. Kinney Rent a Car, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1982