Antoinette Caristo, Appellants v. Augustine Sanzone, Respondents

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in charging the jury on the emergency doctrine because the icy conditions were not a sudden and unexpected emergency, and therefore reversed the Appellate Division's judgment and ordered a new trial. The Court emphasized that a defendant who knows of worsening weather cannot claim an unforeseen emergency. Justice Rosenblatt dissented, arguing that the emergency instruction was appropriate and should have been affirmed.