Kuci v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority
Cases that cite this one
43 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Caristo v. Sanzone (N.Y. 2001)
- Figgiani v. Crociata (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Guzek v. B & L Wholesale Supply, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- The Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation , Doris Kay Dummitt v. A.W. Chesterton , The Matter of Eighth Judicial District Asbestos Litigation , Joann H. Suttner v. A.W. Chesterton Company (N.Y. 2016)
- Pelletier v. Lahm (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Pelletier v. Lahm (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Barath v. Marron (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
- Coleman v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Carson v. Lorenzo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Kabir v. Yousuf (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Youssef v. Siringo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- BARNES, JR., THEODORE F. v. DELLAPENTA, LISA A. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Vasquez v. County of Nassau (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Lifson v. City of Syracuse (N.Y. 2011)
- Cathey v. Gartner (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Richards v. Miller (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Rosario v. Morias (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- Tseytlina v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- Garricks v. City of New York (N.Y. 2003)
- Kyoung Ran Yoon v. Rechler (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Wilson v. Certain Cab Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Ryder v. County of Fulton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Allen v. Passalacqua (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Allen v. Passalacqua (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Whiteside v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation.
In this personal injury action, plaintiff was a passenger on a bus owned by defendant and driven by defendant’s employee. At trial, plaintiff testified that he was thrown across the aisle and hit his head against a metal pole when the moving bus came to an abrupt halt. According to the driver, he was leaving a designated bus stop when a car suddenly appeared on his left and turned right in front of the moving bus. The driver testified that he immediately applied his brakes to avoid hitting the car but was unable to avoid collision.
The jury found defendant liable for plaintiff’s injuries and awarded damages in his favor. Defendant subsequently moved to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a), arguing that it was error for the trial court to refuse its instructions on the emergency doctrine. The court denied the motion, concluding that the driver’s familiarity with the intersection and knowledge that cars frequently turned right from the left lane in front of buses in this area rendered the charge inappropriate. The Appellate Division reversed, vacated the judgment and ordered a new trial.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorably toward giving the requested emergency doctrine instruction to the jury (see, Rivera v New York City Tr. Auth., 77 NY2d 322, 326), we agree with the Appellate Division that it was error to deny defendant’s request. Where some reasonable view of the evidence establishes that an actor was confronted by a sudden and unforeseen occurrence not of the actor’s own making, then the reasonableness of the conduct in the face of the emergency is for the jury (id., at 327). Here, the bus driver’s testimony indicated that the car on his left suddenly and unexpectedly pulled in front of the moving bus. That a driver was aware that cars often made right turns in front of buses would not preclude a jury from deciding that, as to the events in issue in this case, the driver did not anticipate being suddenly cut off by this particular car.
In that we agree with the Appellate Division that the trial court’s erroneous refusal of the requested emergency doctrine
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.