Opinion
05-28-2024
Georgeen INTELLI, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Max D. Leifer, P.C., New York (Max D. Leifer of counsel), for appellant. Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Karin Wolfe of counsel), for respondents.
Max D. Leifer, P.C., New York (Max D. Leifer of counsel), for appellant.
Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Karin Wolfe of counsel), for respondents.
Singh, J.P., Kennedy, Rodriguez, Pitt–Burke, Michael, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judy H. Kim, J.), entered April 10, 2023, which, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendants established entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action where plaintiff alleges that while standing on the Staten Island ferry, the ferry suddenly jerked after striking the dock, causing her to fall and sustain injuries. Defendants submitted evidence showing that the ferry did not suddenly stop or jerk at the time plaintiff fell. A surveillance video taken of the ferry’s interior depicts plaintiff falling after standing and taking a step forward. No other passengers nearby stumbled or moved at the time plaintiff fell.
In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. She failed to provide "objective evidence" that the alleged jerk of the ferry "was extraordinary and violent, of a different class than the jerks and jolts commonly experienced" on the ferry (Atterbury v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 180 A.D.3d 433, 434, 115 N.Y.S.3d 663 [1st Dept. 2020]).
We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.