## Facts

- Amalia De Long called Erie County’s 911 number to report an intruder attempting to break into her home at 319 Victoria Boulevard in Kenmore, near the Kenmore Police Department.
- The 911 complaint writer assured her “Okay, right away,” but mis-transcribed the address as “219 Victoria” and assumed the location was in Buffalo rather than Kenmore.
- The call was routed to Buffalo police dispatch; officers searched for a non-existent address and took no further action despite procedures requiring follow-up when an address cannot be located.
- The 911 operator did not follow required protocols, including confirming the caller’s location and repeating the address back.
- About 15 minutes after the call, Ms. De Long was found outside her home with fatal stab wounds and later died.
- Evidence supported that she relied on the assurance that police were coming and did not seek other protection.

## Issues

1. Whether operation of the 911 system and the call-taker’s assurance that help would come “right away” created a special relationship imposing a duty of care to Ms. De Long, permitting negligence liability for misdirection and failure to follow up.
2. Whether expert testimony valuing the economic worth of a housewife’s household and childcare services was admissible to prove pecuniary loss in a wrongful-death action.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment against the County of Erie and the City of Buffalo.
- It held the evidence permitted a finding of a special relationship and special duty to Ms. De Long, and that defendants negligently performed the assumed duty.
- It upheld the jury’s proximate-cause finding and equal apportionment of liability between County and City.
- It held the expert testimony valuing homemaker services was properly admitted; any imprecision affected weight, not admissibility.

## Legal Principles

- A municipality generally owes police-protection duties to the public at large and is not liable to individuals for failures in police protection absent a special relationship.
- A special relationship may be shown by: (1) an affirmative undertaking by promise or action to act for the injured party, (2) knowledge that inaction could lead to harm, (3) direct contact with the injured party, and (4) justifiable reliance by the injured party.
- Establishing and operating an emergency system and providing specific assurances to an identifiable caller can constitute an affirmative undertaking supporting a special duty.
- Once a special duty is assumed, negligent performance—including failure to follow established emergency-call and dispatch procedures—may support liability if the negligence is a proximate cause of the injury.
- In wrongful-death cases limited to pecuniary loss, household and childcare services provided by a homemaker have compensable economic value, and expert testimony may assist the jury in valuing those services.

## Conclusion

The court held that municipal defendants could be liable for negligent handling of a 911 call where their emergency service and assurances created a special duty and the caller reasonably relied on that undertaking, and it approved expert evidence quantifying the pecuniary value of homemaker services in wrongful-death damages.


De Long v. County of Erie, 60 N.Y.2d 296 (N.Y. 1983)