AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
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
Advocates
Judges

KENNETH SMALLS, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Appellant, et al., defendant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter the NYCTA) failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law regarding whether its employee, a bus driver, was acting beyond the scope of his employment during his altercation with a passenger ( see, CPLR 3212[b]; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562; Riviello v. Waldron, 47 N.Y.2d 297, 302). The circumstances surrounding the altercation are in sharp dispute such that summary judgment is inappropriate ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, supra; Jaccarino v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 252 A.D.2d 572).

Furthermore, the NYCTA is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the evidence presented with regard to the causes of action alleging negligent hiring and retention of its employee ( see, Detone v. Bullit Courier Serv., 140 A.D.2d 278).

O'BRIEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, H. MILLER, and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SMALLS v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY
(Sep 20, 1999)