Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kronengold v. Kronengold

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided May 20, 1992Published

1DissentMcCooe, J.

I respectfully dissent.

The issue is whether the parent’s conduct in allegedly crossing against the red light constitutes nonactionable negligent supervision or actionable negligence because the parent breached a duty owed to the public at large. I find that the action is not maintainable because the parent’s conduct constitutes negligent supervision which is not a recognized tort in New York. (Holodook v Spencer, 36 NY2d 35.)

The child in Holodook (supra) was struck by a vehicle when he ran from between parked cars. The action based on negligent parental supervision was dismissed on the ground…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Holodook v. SpencerNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. Gelbman v. GelbmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
  3. Young v. GreenbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. Agin v. LikensNew York Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Pravato v. PravatoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API