Benita Smith--a New York City transit worker--was shot and killed by her estranged husband while in a subway station's "employees-only" locker room.
When her estate was later awarded damages by a Bronx County Supreme Court jury, the City appealed. Notwithstanding the argument that Smith's death was caused by her colleagues' negligence--because they told her husband where the restricted area was located (without asking for identification)--the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed.
Basically, the AD1 thought the City was liability-free since it had no "special relationship" with Smith, nor was it shown that the woman had "justifiably relied" on the security measures which had been in place.
How justifiable was that?
To view a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Jackson v. City of New York