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.
Beryl McLEOD, appellant, v. COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered September 28, 2005, which, upon an order of the same court entered September 21, 2005, granting the defendants' motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the defendants and against her, dismissing the complaint. The notice of appeal from the order entered September 21, 2005, is deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment entered September 28, 2005 (see CPLR 5512[a] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff fell while on a bus as it pulled away from the stop where she boarded it. She alleged that the defendants were negligent because the operator of the bus pulled away from the stop before she sat down. However, the plaintiff has acknowledged that her claim is not premised on the bus making “a sudden jerk” and that there were no “sudden, unusual and violent jerks, lurches or stops by the bus” in this case.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff was afforded a reasonable opportunity to safely board the bus. The operator of the bus was not required to wait until the plaintiff found a seat before proceeding, and absent any claim that the operation of the bus was “extraordinary and violent, of a different class than the jerks and jolts commonly experienced in city bus travel” (Urquhart v. New York City Tr. Auth., 85 N.Y.2d 828, 830, 623 N.Y.S.2d 838, 647 N.E.2d 1346), the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the motion (see e.g. Delgiudice v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 36 A.D.3d 649, 829 N.Y.S.2d 149; Curley-Concepcion v. New York City Tr. Auth., 276 A.D.2d 463, 714 N.Y.S.2d 239).
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 13, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)