BIERMAN V. CITY OF NEW YORK case brief

 BIERMAN V. CITY OF NEW YORK

• Bierman owns small house flooded by water. She is pro se against Con Ed and NYC

• same problem as Hammontree had – no proof of negligent act and precedent asserts negligence doctrine.

• Judge Younger must overcome the rule of substantive law (negligence).

• cost-spreading – it is better to have losses divided among a large group of individuals as opposed to being concentrated on only the victim

• spread cost among all customers of Con Ed and citizens of New York

• this is a form of insurance, but within a tort law regime

• actor has a customer base to spread the loss amongst

• economic dislocation (we want to prevent this)