The duty of care is a critical concept in negligence actions. The emergency doctrine recognizes a modified standard where there is a qualified emergency. In the seminal case of Rivera v. New York City Transit Authority, 77 N.Y.2d 322 (1991), the Court of Appeals recognized that a person encountering an emergency situation cannot be held to the same standard of conduct as one who has had a full opportunity to reflect on a course of action. It held that “the emergency doctrine recognizes that when an actor is faced with a sudden and unexpected circumstance which leaves little or no time for thought, deliberation or consideration, or causes the actor to be reasonably so disturbed that the actor must make a speedy decision without weighing alternative courses of conduct, the actor may not be negligent if the actions taken are reasonable and prudent in the emergency context…”1
Key issues include whether there is a qualifying emergency, and whether the actions of a party faced with such an emergency situation were reasonable and prudent under the circumstances. Where a defendant asserts the emergency doctrine as a defense, it must be pleaded as an affirmative defense.2
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
