Eackles v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Eackles v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.

207 A.D.2d 691, 616 N.Y.S.2d 374

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 8, 1994·Published

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered on or about September 14, 1993, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted and the complaint dismissed, without costs.

Even assuming that defendants were negligent by failing to prevent passenger entry to a train platform not actually in use, we find that the adult plaintiffs’ actions in attempting to cross from that platform to another by means of climbing over a stationary train rather than using the stairways provided for that purpose was so unforeseeable as to relieve defendants of any liability (see, e.g., Fellis v Old Oaks Country Club, 163 AD2d 509, lv denied 77 NY2d 802). Since the reckless and unforeseeable behavior of these adult plaintiffs was the sole cause of the injuries suffered when they came into contact with electrical wires running over the top of the train, defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Asch and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered on or about September 14, 1993, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted and the complaint dismissed, without costs.

Even assuming that defendants were negligent by failing to prevent passenger entry to a train platform not actually in use, we find that the adult plaintiffs’ actions in attempting to cross from that platform to another by means of climbing over a stationary train rather than using the stairways provided for that purpose was so unforeseeable as to relieve defendants of any liability (see, e.g., Fellis v Old Oaks Country Club, 163 AD2d 509, lv denied 77 NY2d 802). Since the reckless and unforeseeable behavior of these adult plaintiffs was the sole cause of the injuries suffered when they came into contact with electrical wires running over the top of the train, defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Asch and Tom, JJ.

Eackles v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., 207 A.D.2d 691, 616 N.Y.S.2d 374 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

207 A.D.2d 691 (Eackles v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related