Zarilla v. Pennachio
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
A parent owes a duty to protect third parties from harm that is clearly foreseeable from his or her child’s improvident use or operation of a dangerous instrument, where such use is found to be subject to the parent’s control (see Rios v Smith, 95 NY2d 647, 653 [2001]; LaTorre v Genesee Mgt., 90 NY2d 576, 582 [1997]; Nolechek v Gesuale, 46 NY2d 332, 340 [1978]). “[I]tems that are commonly used by children, of suitable age in a manner consistent with their intended use, may not, as a matter of *1041law, be classified as dangerous instruments” (Rios v Smith, 95 NY2d at 653).
Here, the defendant made…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Alvarez v. Prospect HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Nolechek v. GesualeNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Rios v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- LaTorre v. Genesee Management, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Nyhus v. ValentinoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
3Cited by3 opinions
- Reich v. Alexander's, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Koulajian v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Koulajian v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012