The case, determined in 1968 by the New York Courtroom of Appeals, concerned a plaintiff who sought police safety from a identified assailant. The plaintiff had repeatedly requested help, even offering particular particulars concerning the potential menace. Nonetheless, the police failed to offer safety, and the plaintiff was subsequently attacked and significantly injured. The authorized motion sought to carry the municipality chargeable for negligence in failing to offer satisfactory police safety.
The ruling established a major precedent relating to the obligation of municipalities to offer police safety to particular person residents. The courtroom decided {that a} municipality just isn’t typically chargeable for failing to offer particular police safety to a person, even when that particular person has requested such safety. This precept rests on the understanding that police assets are restricted and should be allotted throughout the complete group, and that imposing legal responsibility in such instances may unduly burden municipalities. The choice acknowledges the complicated coverage issues concerned in allocating police assets and avoids inserting an unrealistic burden on native governments.