Musto v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Musto v. City of New York

275 A.D.2d 398, 712 N.Y.S.2d 878, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8833

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

DecidedAugust 21, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 398 (Musto v. City of New York) 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

Musto v. City of New York, 275 A.D.2d 398, 712 N.Y.S.2d 878, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8833 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City Transit Authority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Mastro, J.), dated September 14, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A common carrier owes a duty to an exiting passenger to stop at a place where the passenger may safely disembark and leave the area (see, Miller v Fernan, 73 NY2d 844; Jenkins v New York City Tr. Auth., 262 AD2d 455; Kelleher v F.M.E. Auto Leasing Corp., 192 AD2d 581). There is an issue of fact as to whether the appellant breached this duty. Therefore, summary judgment was properly denied. Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, 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 defendant New York City Transit Authority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Mastro, J.), dated September 14, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A common carrier owes a duty to an exiting passenger to stop at a place where the passenger may safely disembark and leave the area (see, Miller v Fernan, 73 NY2d 844; Jenkins v New York City Tr. Auth., 262 AD2d 455; Kelleher v F.M.E. Auto Leasing Corp., 192 AD2d 581). There is an issue of fact as to whether the appellant breached this duty. Therefore, summary judgment was properly denied. Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 398, 712 N.Y.S.2d 878, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/musto-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack