Opinion
June 15, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant, New York City Transit Authority, "owes no duty to protect a person on its premises from assault by a third person, absent facts establishing a special relationship between the authority and the person assaulted" ( Weiner v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 55 N.Y.2d 175, 178; see, Harrell v. New York City Tr. Auth., 221 A.D.2d 591; Tidd v. New York City Tr. Auth., 218 A.D.2d 694; Alleyne v. New York City Tr. Auth., 208 A.D.2d 666).
The plaintiffs failed to establish that a special relationship existed between the injured plaintiff and the defendant's employees. Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the subway motorman, upon learning that the injured plaintiff was being assaulted, acted within the boundaries of the policy-based governmental immunity established in Weiner v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth. (supra), and observed common standards of behavior ( see, Crosland v. New York City Tr. Auth., 68 N.Y.2d 165).
Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.