Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Juan CARRASQUILLO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SOUTH BUFFALO RAILWAY COMPANY and Genesee Wyoming, Inc., Doing Business as GWI, Defendants-Appellants.
Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he sustained when the vehicle that he was driving was struck by a train that was about to enter the plant where plaintiff was employed. According to plaintiff's deposition testimony, the tracks “[r]un straight into the plant.” Plaintiff had completed his shift at the plant and was leaving the parking lot when the accident occurred, and it is undisputed that the train was traveling at a low rate of speed. Supreme Court properly denied that part of defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as the complaint, as amplified by the bill of particulars, alleges that defendants were negligent in failing to warn of the train's approach by failing to sound the horn or whistle and failing to provide adequate lighting on the train (see generally Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718). We further conclude, however, that the court erred in denying that part of defendants' motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as the complaint, as amplified by the bill of particulars, alleges that defendants were negligent with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, management, construction, control and design of the railroad tracks and crossing at issue. It is undisputed that the railroad tracks and crossing were located entirely within the property of the plant and were owned and operated by plaintiff's employer and defendants had no control over them. Thus, we modify the order accordingly.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by granting the motion in part and dismissing the complaint insofar as the complaint, as amplified by the bill of particulars, alleges that defendants were negligent with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, management, construction, control and design of the railroad tracks and crossing at issue and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 17, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)