AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CARMEN R. VILLAR, Appellant, v. MTA BUS COMPANY et al., Respondents.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

While the plaintiff was a passenger on an M15 express bus in Queens, she allegedly sustained injuries when she was thrown into the seat in front of her after the bus stopped suddenly to avoid a collision with a car which had cut into its lane. The bus was owned by the defendant MTA Bus Company and operated by the defendant Tze M. Cheng.

Pursuant to the emergency doctrine, "when an actor is faced with a sudden and unexpected circumstance which leaves little or no time for thought, deliberation or consideration, or causes the actor to be reasonably so disturbed that the actor must make a speedy decision without weighing alternative courses of conduct, the actor may not be negligent if the actions taken are reasonable and prudent in the emergency context" ( Rivera v New York City Tr. Auth., 77 NY2d 322, 327; see Evans v Bosl, 75 AD3d 491, 492; Miloscia v New York City Bd. of Educ, 70 AD3d 904, 905).

Here, the defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence demonstrating that Tze M. Cheng was confronted with a sudden and unexpected circumstance not of his own making and that, under the circumstances, his actions were reasonable and prudent in response to the emergency ( see Bello v Transit Auth. of NY City, 12 AD3d 58, 60-61). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Evans v Bosl, 75 AD3d at 492; Miloscia v New York City Bd. of Educ., 70 AD3d at 905).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VILLAR v. MTA BUS CO
(Jan 11, 2011)