A Stitch in Haste

Sue early, sue often:

The next-door neighbors of Dr. Nicholas Bartha sued him Friday, claiming the violent explosion that turned his Manhattan townhouse into rubble this week damaged their cooperative apartment and forced them to leave it.
…
The lawsuit, filed in Manhattan’s state Supreme Court, also names Consolidated Edison as a defendant. It accuses the utility of being “reckless, careless and negligent” in failing to have “proper safety devices” and “shut-off systems.”

The quest for a deep pocket has become even more urgent now that Bartha has succumbed to his injuries.

So, is ConEd liable? Of course not.

A basic principle of tort law is that the criminal acts of third parties are generally not foreseeable and a defendant (here ConEd) generally cannot be held liable for such criminal acts. Ditto for the acts of the mentally disturbed, which apparently Dr. Bartha was, in spades.

And since buildings don’t explode with any frequency in New York City, nor are many people arrested for tampering with gas lines, it’s hard to argue that the utility had either actual or constructive notice of any condition that warranted their attention.

So I wouldn’t rush to sell my ConEd stock just because of this lawsuit.

Still, expect lawyer fees and perhaps even a nuisance settlement — the cost of which will passed on to others, whether customers, employees, insurers or investors.

Similar Posts:

• Vienna to Require Dog Insurance
• From User Fees to “Non-User” Fees?
• Activist Bureaucrats Frivolously Sue Over “Microhoo”
• Grand Daft Auto
• Florida College Offers Insurance to Pets But Not Gay Partners

Filed under: Uncategorized