Legal Opinion
Soto v. New York City Transit Authority
New York Court of Appeals
Decided March 23, 2006PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
ClPARICK, J.
The question presented by this appeal is whether plaintiffs reckless behavior was of such a nature as to constitute the sole legal cause of his injuries, vitiating the duty of care of a train operator. We conclude under the circumstances of this case that it was not, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. We further conclude that plaintiffs estimate of his own running speed at the time of the accident was admissible and sufficient to lay a proper foundation for plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert to use in forming his opinion.
Plainti…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Noseworthy v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
- Campbell v. City of ElmiraNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Barker v. KallashNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Coleman v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Barbieri v. VokounAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Williams v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Lapidus v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Speciale v. AchariAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Mirjah v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.