Practice point: The Appellate Division affirmed the granting of defendant's motion for summary judgment in this action to recover damages for personal injuries. The defendant-Transit Authority demonstrated that it had
no special relationship with the plaintiff, thereby establishing its
prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and, in opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue
of fact. The plaintiff's claims that a Transit employee observed another
passenger injuring her on Transit property and failed to summon emergency
assistance in a timely manner from a position of safety is based on
speculation and conjecture, and thus, is insufficient to defeat the
motion.
Student note: Generally, the Transit Authority owes no duty to protect a person on its premises from assault by a third person, absent facts establishing a special relationship between the agency and the person assaulted. A "special relationship" requires justifiable reliance by a plaintiff upon an affirmative undertaking by the municipal defendant to act on the plaintiff's behalf. However, a Transit employee's unreasonable failure to summon aid upon observing an injury being inflicted from a vantage point offering both safety and the means to summon help without danger may fall within the narrow range of circumstances which could be actionable.
Case: Jacobs v. Transit Authority, NY Slip Op 02776 (2d Dep't 2016)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Derivative suits and the futility of making a demand of the board.
