Chunhye Kang-Kim v. City of New York

I agree with the majority’s result. *63However, I write separately because I would decide this case upon a strict application of the law to the uncontested facts. Further, I see no purpose in the majority’s disparagement of the expert testimony, the admission of which was not an improvident exercise of the trial court’s discretion (see Selkowitz v County of Nassau, 45 NY2d 97, 101-102 [1978]).

In my view it is decisive that there was no evidence in the trial record that “due care was not exercised in the preparation of the design” of the subject intersection (Weiss v Fote, 7 NY2d 579, 586…