CRUZ v. Christoffe Cintron, et al., defendants-appellants. (2026)

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, and the defendants Christoffe Cintron and Richely Cintron separately appeal, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gina Abadi, J.), dated July 13, 2023.  The judgment, insofar as appealed from by the plaintiff, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority, MTA Bus Company, and Loraine Lord on the issue of liability, is in favor of those defendants and against the plaintiff, in effect, dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants.  The judgment, insofar as appealed from by the defendants Christoffe Cintron and Richely Cintron, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority, MTA Bus Company, and Loraine Lord on the issue of liability, is in favor of those defendants and, in effect, against Christoffe Cintron and Richely Cintron dismissing their cross-claim asserted against those defendants.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable by the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when a motor vehicle in which he was a passenger (hereinafter the Cintron vehicle), which was operated by the defendant Christoffe Cintron and owned by the defendant Richely Cintron (hereinafter together the Cintron defendants), collided with a public bus operated by the defendant Loraine Lord. The plaintiff commenced this action against the Cintron defendants, Lord, and the defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority, and MTA Bus Company (hereinafter collectively with Lord, the MTA defendants).  The Cintron defendants asserted a cross-claim against the MTA defendants for contribution and/or indemnification.  Two other passengers in the Cintron vehicle commenced separate personal injury actions that were joined with this action for the purposes of a trial on the issue of liability (see Garcia v. New York City Tr. Auth., ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2026 WL 1084754 [decided herewith];  Rios v. New York City Tr. Auth., ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2026 WL 1084810 [decided herewith] ).

Following the trial on the issue of liability, the jury returned a verdict finding that Lord's negligence in operating the bus was not a substantial factor in causing the accident, that Christoffe Cintron was negligent in operating the Cintron vehicle, and, in effect, that his negligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident.  Thereafter, the plaintiff and the Cintron defendants separately moved, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside, as against the weight of the evidence, so much of the jury's verdict as found that Lord's negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the accident.  The Supreme Court, among other things, denied those branches of the motions.  The court issued a judgment dated July 13, 2023, in favor of the MTA defendants and against the plaintiff, in effect, dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the MTA defendants, and, in effect, against the Cintron defendants dismissing their cross-claim asserted against the MTA defendants.  The plaintiff and the Cintron defendants separately appeal.

For the reasons set forth in our decision and order on a related appeal (see Garcia v. New York City Tr. Auth., ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2026 WL 1084754 [decided herewith] ), the jury's verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.

The parties' remaining contentions are either without merit or not properly before this Court.

BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., FORD, WAN and LOVE, JJ., concur.