MARASHIAN v. CITY OF UTICA

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: A county may not be held responsible for the negligent acts of the Sheriff and his deputies on the theory of respondeat superior, in the absence of a local law assuming such responsibility (see, Schulik v County of Monroe, 202 A.D.2d 960; Wilson v Sponable, 81 A.D.2d 1, 10-12, appeal dismissed 54 N.Y.2d 834; cf., Barr v County of Albany, 50 N.Y.2d 247, 256-257). The 1989 amendment to New York Constitution, article XIII, § 13 (a) merely allows a county to accept responsibility for the negligent acts of the Sheriff; it does not impose liability upon the county for the acts of the Sheriff or his deputies on a theory of respondeat superior (see, Wilson v Sponable, supra, at 11-12). Oneida County failed to provide evidence that it had no local law whereby it assumed liability for the acts of the Sheriff and his deputies (cf., Schulik v County of Monroe, supra). Consequently, its motion for summary judgment was properly denied.