Collazo v. MTA-New York City Transit
This text of 74 A.D.3d 642 (Collazo v. MTA-New York City Transit) 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.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered November 12, 2009, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when a bus in which plaintiffs were passengers was involved in a collision with a truck rented by de[643]*643fendant Cancel from defendant U-Haul Co. of Arizona (U-Haul), denied U-Haul’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion was properly denied because while the Federal Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (49 USC § 30106) (Graves Amendment) bars negligence claims against car-rental companies based solely on a theory of vicarious liability (see Hernandez v Sanchez, 40 AD3d 446, 447 [2007]), here, the complaint alleges, inter alia, negligent maintenance of U-Haul’s truck. Such claim is not barred by the Graves Amendment since the statute does not absolve leasing companies of their own negligence (see Novovic v Greyhound Lines, Inc., 2008 WL 5000228, *3, 2008 US Dist LEXIS 94176, *7-9 [ED NY 2008]).
We have considered U-Haul’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
74 A.D.3d 642, 905 N.Y.S.2d 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collazo-v-mta-new-york-city-transit-nyappdiv-2010.