Docstoc

Ventricelli v. Kinney System Rent a Car_ Inc Case Brief

Document Sample
Ventricelli v. Kinney System Rent a Car_ Inc Case Brief Powered By Docstoc
					Ventricelli v. Kinney System Rent a Car, Inc. 45 N.Y.2d 950, 411 N.Y.S.2d 555, 383 N.E.2d 1149, modified, 46 N.Y.2d 770, 413 N.Y.S.2d 655, 386 N.E.2d 263 (1978)


   



Kinney rented a car that had a defective trunk. He and a friend were standing on the street, trying to get the parked car's trunk shut when someone named Maldonado crashed his car into Ventricelli. Ventricelli sued Kinney for negligence. The Trial Court found for Ventricelli and awarded him $550k. Kinney appealed. The Appellate Court reversed and dismissed the case. Ventricelli appealed. The New York Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Court and dismissed the case. o The New York Supreme Court found that, while Kinney's negligence was a cause of the accident, it was not the proximate cause. o The Court felt that it was foreseeable that Ventricelli would have to spend time getting the trunk closed, it was not foreseeable that this would expose him to getting hit by a car.  Ventricelli could have theoretically been standing behind the car for a number of reasons. o In a dissent it was argued that Kinney's negligence increased the time that Ventricelli would have to spend exposed to possibly getting hit by a car, and therefore Kinney increased the probability of Ventricelli getting injured. Getting hit by a car isn't normally a consequence of closing a trunk. However, getting your hand caught in the truck is. If Kinney's negligence resulted in Ventricelli slamming his hand in the trunk, they would probably be held liable for that injury.

Project Wonderful - Your ad here, right now, for as low as $0


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Stats:
views:390
posted:1/29/2008
language:English
pages:1