Judge William Skretny
Young-Gibson (Plaintiff) experienced "migraine-like symptoms" while a guest at Patel's hotel. For two days doctor Foley was unable to tell Plaintiff which pharmacy he planned to send her prescription. His many telephone calls to the hotel went unanswered. District court granted Patel judgment on Plaintiff's allegations that Patel's failure to answer the phone prevented her from learning the location of her prescription, and that she suffered ills—requiring doctors visits, surgeries and expensive medications—while waiting to hear from Foley. Discussing Dean v. City of Buffalo and Wassell v. Adams, the court determined that assuming that an innkeeper's failure to answer the hotel telephone created some risk sufficient to invoke the innkeeper's duty of care, the "class of foreseeable hazards" prong of New York's duty inquiry excluded Plaintiff's claim. Noting that an innkeeper's duty is to provide a safe harbor, the court observed that even if Patel's duty to Plaintiff should have compelled Patel to answer the hotel's phone, the hazards that purportedly afflicted Plaintiff were not within the class of hazards that such a duty would exist to prevent. Plaintiff's harm was brought about by an occurrence outside the scope of Patel's duty.
