Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Kenneth SMITH, et al., Respondents, v. Paul K. TAYLOR, Appellant.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Slobod, J.), dated June 19, 2000, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The injured plaintiff, Kenneth Smith (hereinafter the plaintiff), voluntarily agreed to help the defendant's son remove a tree from the defendant's property. The plaintiff brought his own ladder and chainsaw to the defendant's property. The plaintiff climbed his ladder and proceeded to cut a branch that he determined should be removed to provide space for him. The branch fell to the ground, hit the base of the ladder, and the plaintiff fell off the ladder.
A landowner owes a duty to another on his land to keep it in a reasonably safe condition (see, Basso v. Miller, 40 N.Y.2d 233, 241, 386 N.Y.S.2d 564, 352 N.E.2d 868). However, where, as here, the injury resulted not from any unsafe condition of the defendant's land but as a direct result of the plaintiff's use of his own equipment while engaged in an activity he volunteered to undertake, the landowner is not liable (see, Macey v. Truman, 70 N.Y.2d 918, 919, 524 N.Y.S.2d 393, 519 N.E.2d 304; Collins v. Petroski, 155 A.D.2d 799, 548 N.Y.S.2d 76). Under these circumstances, “the law imposed no duty on defendant as landowner to protect plaintiff from the unfortunate consequences of his own actions” (Macey v. Truman, supra, at 919, 524 N.Y.S.2d 393, 519 N.E.2d 304).
The plaintiff's affidavit submitted in opposition to the motion stated that the defendant told him which branches to cut. However, this was designed to avoid the consequences of his earlier deposition testimony where he stated that he determined to cut the branch that caused the accident. Therefore, the affidavit was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to the defendant's negligence (see, Bloom v. La Femme Fatale of Smithtown, 273 A.D.2d 187, 709 N.Y.S.2d 431).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: January 22, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)