From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hines v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 19, 2016
139 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

05-19-2016

Steven HINES, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, et al., Defendants–Respondents, Academy Express LLC, etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants.

Mintzer Sarowitz Zeris Ledva & Meyers, LLP, New York (Kevin L. Kelly of counsel), for appellants. Lawrence Heisler, Brooklyn (Timothy J. O'Shaughnessy of counsel), for respondents.


Mintzer Sarowitz Zeris Ledva & Meyers, LLP, New York (Kevin L. Kelly of counsel), for appellants.

Lawrence Heisler, Brooklyn (Timothy J. O'Shaughnessy of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered on or about October 20, 2015, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied the motion of defendants Academy Express LLC (Academy) and Damon Bassano for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Plaintiff, while a passenger on a bus owned by defendant Transit Authority, was injured when that bus collided with another bus owned by Academy, and driven by Bassano. The rear right side of the Transit Authority bus collided with the front driver's corner of the Academy bus when the Transit Authority bus changed lanes from the left to the right lane, in which the Academy bus was proceeding.

Bassano testified, without contradiction, that there was approximately one second, from when he first saw the Transit Authority bus passing him, until impact. Under such circumstances, he had no time to anticipate the Transit Authority bus cutting him off, and his actions were not negligent as a matter of law, under such emergency conditions (see Rivera v. New York City Tr. Auth., 77 N.Y.2d 322, 327, 567 N.Y.S.2d 629, 569 N.E.2d 432 [1991] ; Ward v. Cox, 38 A.D.3d 313, 831 N.Y.S.2d 406 [1st Dept.2007] ). “[C]ourts have repeatedly rejected, as a basis for imposing liability, speculation concerning the possible accident-avoidance measures of a defendant faced with an emergency” (Caban v. Vega, 226 A.D.2d 109, 111, 640 N.Y.S.2d 58 [1st Dept.1996] ).

SWEENY, J.P., RENWICK, ANDRIAS, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hines v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 19, 2016
139 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Hines v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Case Details

Full title:Steven HINES, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: May 19, 2016

Citations

139 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 3963
30 N.Y.S.3d 552

Citing Cases

Kitchen v. Carioto Produce Inc.

and his co-employee passenger testified that they did not know whether such plaintiff did anything wrong in…