Skip to Main Content


Understanding The Emergency Doctrine in New York State Car Accident Claims

Photo of Peter J. Gregory
Peter J. Gregory
Feb 29, 2024
View Profile More Posts

In the busy streets within the Greater Rochester Region, car accidents are, unfortunately, a common occurrence. The moments leading up to a car accident are often filled with split-second decisions, some of which can significantly impact the legal outcomes for those involved. One legal concept that plays a crucial role in these scenarios is the "emergency doctrine." This doctrine may provide a defense for drivers who find themselves making rapid judgments in response to unforeseen circumstances. This article delves into the nuances of the emergency doctrine as it applies to car accidents in New York State, offering insights into its implications for both plaintiffs and defendants in personal injury cases.

Understanding the Emergency Doctrine

The emergency doctrine is a legal principle that recognizes the chaos and unpredictability inherent in certain situations, such as car accidents. Under New York State law, this doctrine acknowledges that individuals faced with sudden, unexpected circumstances requiring immediate action may not be able to exercise the same level of judgment and care as they would under normal conditions. Essentially, the emergency doctrine provides a potential defense for individuals who, when confronted with an emergency not of their own making, act in a manner that might otherwise be considered negligent. It's important to note that the doctrine applies only when the emergency is unforeseen and not caused by the defendant. For example, if a defendant claims a car accident was caused by emergency brake failure, that defendant must also prove that they took reasonable steps to maintain the brakes in their vehicle. 

Application in Car Accidents

In the context of car accidents, the emergency doctrine can significantly impact the outcome of a personal injury lawsuit. For example, if a driver swerves to avoid a child darting into the street and, in doing so, collides with another vehicle, the emergency doctrine might be invoked as a defense. The court will consider several factors, including: the suddenness of the emergency, the reasonableness of the driver's response, and whether the emergency was created by the defendant. The rationale behind this doctrine is to acknowledge the human element in emergency situations, understanding that the choices made in a split second, under stress, may not be perfect. However, for the emergency doctrine to apply, the reaction to the emergency must be reasonable. This reasonableness standard is assessed from the perspective of a person in the defendant's position, facing the same sudden and unexpected circumstances.

Legal Implications

The emergency doctrine's application can have significant legal implications in car accident cases. If successfully invoked by a defendant, it can lead to a reduction or even a dismissal of liability for damages resulting from the accident. This outcome hinges on convincing the court or jury that the defendant's actions, though possibly resulting in harm, were a reasonable response to an unexpected emergency. For plaintiffs, the emergency doctrine represents a potential hurdle in establishing the defendant's negligence and legal liability. It necessitates a thorough examination of the circumstances leading up to the accident to demonstrate that either no true emergency existed or that the defendant's response to the emergency was unreasonable under the circumstances or that the emergency was foreseeable and somehow caused by the defendant's own actions or inactions.

Evidence and Testimony

Proving or disproving the applicability of the emergency doctrine in a car accident case involves a detailed analysis of evidence and testimony. Eyewitness accounts, video footage, accident reconstruction reports, and expert testimony can all play crucial roles in painting a clear picture of the moments leading up to the accident. These pieces of evidence help the court or jury determine whether the criteria for the emergency doctrine apply.  

Practical Advice

For individuals involved in a car accident in New York State, understanding the emergency doctrine is crucial. If you believe your actions were in response to an emergency situation, documenting the circumstances as thoroughly as possible can be invaluable. This documentation might include photographs of the scene, statements from eyewitnesses, and any other evidence that can help establish the sudden and unforeseen nature of the emergency. Conversely, if you are seeking to hold another party liable for damages resulting from a car accident, being aware of the emergency doctrine is equally important. Anticipating this defense and preparing evidence that counters its applicability will be key to your case.


The emergency doctrine serves as a critical legal principle in New York State car accident cases, acknowledging the complexity of human decision-making under duress. Whether you are a defendant seeking to invoke this doctrine or a plaintiff aiming to overcome it, the key lies in a comprehensive understanding of the circumstances surrounding the accident. Both parties must be prepared to engage in a detailed examination of the evidence to argue the presence or absence of a legitimate emergency and the reasonableness of the response to it. Navigating the intricacies of the emergency doctrine and its application in car accidents requires a nuanced understanding of legal principles and a strategic approach to evidence and testimony. For individuals involved in such cases, consulting with an attorney who specializes in personal injury law and is familiar with New York's legal landscape can provide key guidance and improve the chances of a favorable outcome.

If you or a loved one has suffered injuries in a car accident, it is imperative to consult with a knowledgeable personal injury lawyer who can navigate the legal complexities and help you secure the compensation you deserve. Remember, time is of the essence, so don't delay in seeking legal advice to protect your rights and ensure a smoother path towards recovery.

Contact Us for a Free Consultation

About the author: Peter J. Gregory is a partner with MCCM Personal Injury Lawyers in Rochester, NY.  He is a trial lawyer with extensive experience resolving disputes in state and federal trial courts. As a personal injury lawyer, Gregory focuses on advising clients who have been injured or lost loved ones in accidents caused by the carelessness or recklessness of others. Please feel free to contact him directly at or (585) 512-3506.

This publication is intended as an information source for clients, prospective clients, and colleagues and constitutes attorney advertising. The content should not be considered legal advice and readers should not act upon information in this publication without individualized professional counsel.

About MCCM

McConville Considine Cooman & Morin, P.C. is a full-service law firm based in Rochester, New York, providing high-quality legal services to businesses and individuals since 1979.  With over a dozen attorneys and a full paralegal support staff, the firm is well-positioned to right-size services tailored to each client. We are large enough to provide expertise in a broad range of practice areas, yet small enough to devote prompt, personal attention to our clients.

We represent a diverse range of clients located throughout New York State and New England.  They include individuals, numerous manufacturing and service industry businesses, local governments, and health care professionals, provider groups, facilities and associations. We also serve as local counsel to out-of-state clients and their attorneys who have litigation pending in Western New York courts.  For more information, please contact us at 585.546.2500.