From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ferris v. S.L. Capital Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 6, 2001
289 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Summary

holding a bus driver was not acting within the scope of this employment when he punched a taxicab passenger nearby

Summary of this case from Minzer v. Barga

Opinion

5536

December 6, 2001.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered June 15, 2000, which granted defendants-respondents' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Wallach, Marlow, JJ.


Plaintiff alleges that following a minor traffic accident between the taxi cab in which he was a passenger and defendants' bus, he got out of the cab, approached the window next to the driver's seat, berated codefendant bus driver's driving and returned to the cab, whereupon the bus driver got out of the bus, approached the cab and punched plaintiff in the face through the open cab window. The record establishes that there were no passengers on the bus. The motion court correctly held that such allegations fail to show that the bus driver was acting within the scope of his employment when he punched plaintiff, and that defendants bus owners therefore cannot be held liable on the theory of respondeat superior (see, Stavitz v. City of New York, 98 A.D.2d 529, 531-532, citing Vargas v. Correa, 416 F. Supp. 266, 272; compare, Adams v. New York City Tr. Auth., 211 A.D.2d 285, 294-295, affd on other grounds 88 N.Y.2d 116, with Smalls v. New York City Tr. Auth., 264 A.D.2d 771).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Ferris v. S.L. Capital Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 6, 2001
289 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

holding a bus driver was not acting within the scope of this employment when he punched a taxicab passenger nearby

Summary of this case from Minzer v. Barga
Case details for

Ferris v. S.L. Capital Corp.

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH FERRIS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, JONATHAN A. RAPPORT v. S.L. CAPITAL…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 6, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
734 N.Y.S.2d 36

Citing Cases

Minzer v. Barga

Thus, Uber cannot be held vicariously liable. See, Adams v. New York City Transit Auth., 211 A.D.2d 285, 295…