Rushink v. Gerstheimer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department · 1980 · Torts

TortsNegligenceStatutory negligenceProximate causeVehicle and Traffic Law § 1210(a)unattended vehiclekeys in ignitionunauthorized user

Facts

Defendant Mary Jane Gerstheimer drove her husband's car to a pharmacy on the grounds of the Middletown Psychiatric Center and parked it in front of the pharmacy. She left the car unattended with the keys in the ignition. Shortly thereafter, Stephen E. Rushink, a resident patient at the facility, drove away in the car and was killed when it left the road and struck a tree. Plaintiff claimed the statutory violation caused the accident, while defendants argued the statute did not apply and was not the proximate cause.

Issue

Does Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1210(a), which forbids leaving an unattended vehicle without removing or hiding the key, protect an unauthorized user of the vehicle from the consequences of that user's own operation of it? If not, were the parties nevertheless entitled to summary judgment on the complaint?

Rule

Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1210(a) was enacted to deter theft and injury from the operation of motor vehicles by unauthorized persons, but it was not designed to protect unauthorized users from the consequences of their own actions. A person under a legal disability may still pursue a common-law negligence claim apart from the statute, but factual issues concerning liability preclude summary judgment where such a claim is sufficiently pleaded.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Albany, Nora Feld left her SUV unlocked at a curbside bakery with the key in the ignition. Malik Soren, who had no permission to use it, drove off and was seriously injured when he lost control on an icy street.

If Malik sues Nora and argues that her violation of a statute requiring drivers not to leave unattended vehicles with keys inside establishes liability, which is the strongest response?

Explanation. The majority held that the unattended-vehicle key statute was enacted to deter theft and injury caused by unauthorized operators, but not to protect the unauthorized user from the consequences of that user's own actions. Thus, an unauthorized taker injured while operating the vehicle cannot base recovery on the statutory violation.