Assante v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Assante v. New York City Transit Authority

22 A.D.3d 698, 805 N.Y.S.2d 397

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 24, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 22 A.D.3d 698 (Assante v. New York City Transit Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Assante v. New York City Transit Authority, 22 A.D.3d 698, 805 N.Y.S.2d 397 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated October 22, 2003, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To establish a prima facie case of negligence against a common carrier for injuries sustained by a passenger when the vehicle comes to a halt, the plaintiff must establish that the stop caused a jerk or lurch that was “unusual and violent” (Urquhart v New York City Tr. Auth., 85 NY2d 828, 830 [1995]; see Trudell v New York R. T. Corp., 281 NY 82, 85 [1939]). In opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment, the statements in the plaintiffs affidavit, along with her testimony given at the General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing, were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the bus driver was negligent (see Jenkins v Westchester County, 278 AD2d 370 [2000]; see also Urquhart v New York City Tr. Auth., supra). Schmidt, J.P., Cozier, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated October 22, 2003, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To establish a prima facie case of negligence against a common carrier for injuries sustained by a passenger when the vehicle comes to a halt, the plaintiff must establish that the stop caused a jerk or lurch that was “unusual and violent” (Urquhart v New York City Tr. Auth., 85 NY2d 828, 830 [1995]; see Trudell v New York R. T. Corp., 281 NY 82, 85 [1939]). In opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment, the statements in the plaintiffs affidavit, along with her testimony given at the General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing, were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the bus driver was negligent (see Jenkins v Westchester County, 278 AD2d 370 [2000]; see also Urquhart v New York City Tr. Auth., supra). Schmidt, J.P., Cozier, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 698, 805 N.Y.S.2d 397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/assante-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack