Proving Liability When a Bus Stops Short

            Most New Yorkers are accustom to the violent stops and starts of buses driving on New York City streets.  However, few are aware of the level of proof required to win a lawsuit when someone is injured when a stopping bus throws a passenger to the floor.  These cases are made more difficult by the fact that while the injured person is being taken to the hospital the New York City Transit Authority doing everything possible to make victory at trial impossible.  First, the police are rarely called – instead a NYCTA dispatcher is called to the scene to investigate the accident (no one knows how this is permitted).  Second, the contact information of witnesses “favorable” to the injured person is rarely obtained.  Imagine, while you are writhing in pain n route to the hospital, the NYCTA (a public authority) is trying to sanitize the case to prevent you from obtaining a recovery in Court.  However, the Courts – and jurors – have ruled in favor of plaintiffs where we can show that the jerking of the bus went beyond the normal stops and starts of City traffic.

            In Urquhart v. NYCTA, 85 NY2d 828, 830, 623 N.Y.S.2d 838 (1995) the Court of Appeals held that the plaintiff’s testimony that the bus was traveling at a high rate of speed followed by a sudden stop that caused him to fall was sufficient to support a jury verdict.  The Court held that the plaintiff’s evidence is:

more that a mere characterization of the stop.  It provided objective evidence of the force of the stop sufficient to establish an inference that the stop was extraordinary and violent, of a different class than the jerks and jolts commonly experienced in city bus travel and, therefore, attributable to the negligence of defendant.

Id at 830.  The First Department has examined the issues raised in the course of this trial multiple times within the last few years.  In Crane v. NYCTA, 60 A.D.3d 467; 874 N.Y.S.2d 112 (1^st Dept. 2009) when the bus stopped suddenly causing her to fall.  The Court affirmed an award of summary judgment to plaintiff based solely on plaintiff’s deposition testimony that the bus’ “sudden stop caused a jerk or lurch that was ‘unusual and violent.’"  In Grant v. NYCTA, 61 A.D.3d 422; 877 N.Y.S.2d 31 (1^st Dept. 2009), the Court reversed the trial court’s order dismissing the case based solely on plaintiff’s testimony that the bus was moving very quickly then stopped so suddenly that he and another passenger fell to the floor.  The Court held that “such testimony constitutes ‘objective evidence that the force of the stop sufficient to establish an inference that the stop was extraordinary and violent, of a different class than the jerks and jolts commonly experienced in city bus travel and, therefore, attributable to the negligence of defendant.’ 

            In the case of Saracino v. NYCTA (N.Y. Sup Index #104263/07), we successfully argued that the plaintiff’s testimony established liability.  In that case the plaintiff testified that the bus accelerated suddenly and at such a speed that she was being propelled to the rear of the bus and had to hold on to the tops of the seats to avoid falling.  Then, without warning, the bus driver slammed on the brakes causing her to lose her footing and fall towards the front of the bus and crash into a seat.  In addition, we relied on the medical testimony of her treating surgeon to explain to the jury that the amount of force required to sustain her injuries was consistent with a serious impact and not from merely falling from a standing position.