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

ANGELINE FITZGERALD, plaintiff-respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, ET AL., appellants, HARRISON WARNER, defendant-respondent.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The accident at issue involved a collision between a bus owned by the New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter the NYCTA) and driven by the defendant John Gordon (hereinafter the NYCTA defendants), and a car driven by the codefendant Harrison Warner. The plaintiff was a passenger on the bus when the accident occurred. It is undisputed that at the time of the impact the bus was stopped partially in a bus stop, angled so that its rear section protruded into, and obstructed, a lane of moving traffic. Warner stated at his examination before trial that his car had been traveling about two car lengths behind the bus when the bus's brake lights went on, it signaled right, and it started to move into the right parking lane, where the bus stop was located. Warner stated that he applied his brakes to slow down when he saw the rear lights of the bus go on, and that he hit his brakes hard when he realized the bus had suddenly stopped without completing its lane change. The fact that a codefendant might be negligent as a matter of law for rearending a stopped vehicle does not mean that the operator of the stopped vehicle was necessarily free of negligence ( see e.g. Lenahan v. Goucher, 65 N.Y.2d 1034, revg on dissent of Yesawich, J., 111 A.D.2d 546, 548; Heal v. Liszewski, 294 A.D.2d 911; Purcell v. Axelsen, 286 A.D.2d 379; Colonna v. Suarez, 278 A.D.2d 355; Mundo v. City of Yonkers, 249 A.D.2d 572, affd 93 N.Y.2d 862; Niemiec v. Jones, 237 A.D.2d 267). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court properly denied summary judgment to the NYCTA defendants because questions of fact were raised as to whether the bus was operated in a negligent manner and, if so, whether that negligence contributed to the accident.

S. MILLER, J.P., FRIEDMANN, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

FITZGERALD v. N.Y.C. TRANSIT AUTHORTIY
(Dec 15, 2003)