Jeffrey Samel & Partners

Mass Transit

JEFFREY SAMEL & PARTNERS represents both municipal and non-municipal operators of transportation systems, including subways, trains, commuter and tour buses, school buses, and ambulances. We provide a successful defense to such "common carriers" by employing our thorough knowledge of the specific statutes, regulations, and case law that are unique to these clients. Similarly, we rely upon our intimate knowledge of the specific legal issues regarding the defense of municipal entities, including school boards, and police, fire, and parks departments, to obtain orders of dismissal, or to secure insurance coverage, indemnification, contribution, or defense costs from third parties.

Trial Successes

Faber v. NYCHA and NYCTA [Supreme New York] Trial Dismissal Plaintiff claimed that he struck his head due to a defective hatch door of an elevator in a Housing Authority project. He then walked to a nearby subway station in a dazed condition, and fell onto the subway tracks as a train entered the station. Plaintiff suffered very serious injuries as a result. At trial, we successfully precluded testimony from the plaintiff’s engineering expert, which was being offered to establish that the train motorman should have been able to bring his train to a stop before coming into contact with plaintiff in the roadbed. The lower court then granted our motion for a Trial Order of Dismissal, as plaintiff could not prove a prima facie case of liability against Transit. The preclusion of the plaintiff’s expert and the granting of the Trial Order of Dismissal, were affirmed by the Appellate Division. Faber v. New York City Housing Authority 258 AD2d 394, 685 N.Y.S.2d 691 (1st Dept. 1999) (Jeffrey Samel/David Samel)

Ortiz v. NYCTA [Supreme New York] Defense Verdict Plaintiff claimed to have tripped and fallen over a cracked portion of concrete on the subway train platform at the 59th Street-Columbus Circle station in Manhattan. Despite plaintiff's trial testimony to the contrary, we confronted her with her pretrial deposition testimony, to the effect that the accident occurred as plaintiff's train was entering the station, and thereby convinced the jury that the sole proximate cause of the accident was plaintiff hurrying to catch her train before it left without her. (Michael Pomposello)

Bae v. NYCTA [Supreme Queens] Defense Verdict Plaintiff claimed that she was a passenger on a bus and was violently thrown from her seat when the bus came to a sudden and unexpected stop. The bus operator denied that anything unusual had occurred in his operation of the bus. Plaintiff sustained serious injuries, ultimately requiring lumbar fusion surgery. Based upon evidence provided by an independent eyewitness, whose cooperation we secured, we successfully argued to the jury that plaintiff fell because she was not holding on while standing in a moving bus. (Michael Pomposello)

Micciche v. NYCTA [Supreme Richmond] Defense Verdict Plaintiff was walking to the front of a bus to exit, when she was thrown to the floor. The bus operator testified that he was forced to stop short, as a result of someone throwing ice and snow at the bus's front windshield. We successfully argued to the jury that the sudden stop was not the fault of the bus driver, but was rather due to an unexpected emergency not of the driver’s own making. (Robert Spevack)

Ramirez v. NYCTA [Supreme Queens] Defense Verdict Plaintiff testified that she was caused to fall as she was descending the exterior steps at the Willets Point train station, as a result of a defect in the stairs. We presented the NYCTA station supervisor, who testified on the basis of his contemporaneous accident report, that plaintiff told him that she had been pushed down the stairs by another commuter. We convinced the jury that plaintiff’s current version of the incident was not believable, and that the Transit Authority was not responsible for an incident in which one commuter pushes another. (Robert Spevack)

Arden v. NYCTA [Supreme New York] Trial Dismissal Plaintiff alleged she tripped and fell over an uneven emergency subway hatch cover in the sidewalk on Lexington Avenue in midtown Manhattan. Plaintiff fractured her right elbow and suffered torn ligaments to the right shoulder. After plaintiff rested her case, we moved to dismiss for failing to prove the essential element of notice of the defective hatch door. The trial court agreed with our contention that there was no proof of actual or constructive notice, and that plaintiff could not rely upon the legal doctrine of res ipsa loquitor. (Michael Pomposello)

Morris v. MABSTOA & NYCTA [Supreme New York] Defense Verdict Plaintiff claimed that as she was exiting a NYCTA bus on Broadway in Manhattan, she stepped directly into a hole in the roadway, causing her foot to twist. Plaintiff suffered a fractured ankle. We successfully argued to the jury that plaintiff had not proven that the bus operator had failed in his duty to provide her with a reasonably safe place to alight. (Michael Pomposello)

Gueye v. NYCTA [Supreme New York] Defense Verdict Plaintiff was riding an escalator in the 34th Street 6th Avenue Subway Station in Manhattan, and claimed that the escalator suddenly stopped, causing her to fall. Plaintiff sustained a left ankle tendon tear, requiring a surgical repair. The NYCTA and Police Aided accident reports confirmed the accident details. Plaintiff relied at trial upon the legal doctrine of res ipsa loquitor, and also upon documentary proof that there had been prior malfunctions in this escalator during the 12- month period before this accident. We successfully argued to the jury that the escalator maintenance records actually revealed that the escalator was properly maintained and that the previous malfunctions were unrelated to the unforeseen malfunction that caused the escalator to stop suddenly while plaintiff was a passenger. The jury deliberated only 20 minutes before rendering a defense verdict. (Michael Pomposello)

Moretti v. Wilford Sanon, MTA LI Bus [Supreme Nassau] Two Defense Verdicts This wrongful death suit arose out of a one-vehicle accident that occurred during a heavy snowstorm. Plaintiff was a passenger in an MTA vehicle that was providing him with mandatory alternate transportation for the disabled. The MTA van hit a snow-bank, ran off the road, and struck a tree. The accident caused plaintiff to fall from his seat and sustain a fractured hip. He died in the hospital shortly after undergoing hip surgery. The jury delivered a unanimous defense verdict in, agreeing with our argument that the unfortunate accident was not due to any negligence on the part of the van operator. The trial judge set aside the verdict as against the weight of the credible evidence, but on re-trial, a different jury delivered a second defense verdict. The court then denied plaintiff’s motion to set aside the second defense verdict on the basis of the fact that two juries had now reached the same conclusion. (Robert Spevack)

Omelina v. NYCTA [Supreme Richmond] Defense Verdict Plaintiff, a passenger on a NYCTA bus, claimed to have fallen when the bus suddenly swerved in order to avoid an accident with a vehicle that had cut the bus off. We convinced the jury that the bus driver was faced with an emergency situation, not of his own making, and was thus not at fault for the accident or plaintiff’s injuries. (Michael Pomposello)

Hernandez v. MTA Long Island Bus [Supreme Nassau] Defense Verdict Plaintiff was crossing a busy street in Nassau County in front of the stopped bus from which he had just exited, when he was struck by a passing bus. Plaintiff claimed that the driver of the bus that struck him should have proceeded more carefully, because bus operators were all aware that passengers regularly cross the street at that point to transfer from one bus to another. The jury rendered a defense verdict, agreeing with our argument that the bus operator had no duty to anticipate that a passenger would illegally cross the street in mid-block, and that he did not have sufficient time to brake after seeing plaintiff emerge from the front of the stopped bus. (Kevin Bigelow)

Summary Judgment & Dispositive Motions

Clifford v. LIRR. [Supreme New York] In a case that garnered much media attention, plaintiff, a retired NYPD sergeant and current attorney, who is commonly referred to as the “LIRR Vigilante,” sought to recover monetary damages for causes of action sounding in slander, libel, false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil rights violations, allegedly stemming from an altercation that occurred aboard a LIRR commuter train and an ensuing police investigation. For a substantial period of time prior to the date of incident, plaintiff had undertaken a somewhat bizarre course of conduct, as part of his one-man crusade to instill his personal sense of etiquette and decorum among riders on the LIRR. Plaintiff conceded that he had previously threatened several passengers with a citizen's arrest because of what he thought was excessively loud talking. Upon receipt of this assignment, we assembled a complete history of plaintiff’s inappropriate behavior as a train passenger, and prepared a pre-answer motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. The court agreed with our arguments and proof, and dismissed plaintiff's complaint in its entirety as to all defendants. (Peter H. Paretsky)