New York high court tosses common carrier rule by the wayside.The New York New York, state, United States New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of Court of Appeals recently held that the common carrier liability rule--a century-old legal theory that imposes absolute liability on common carriers for their employees' misconduct--is no longer viable in that state. (Adams v. New York City New York City: see New York, city. New York City City (pop., 2000: 8,008,278), southeastern New York, at the mouth of the Hudson River. The largest city in the U.S. Transit Authority, No. 95, 1996 WL 220767 (N.Y. May 2, 1996).) Writing for a unanimous court, Judge Vito Titone noted that the "special hazards" of early rail travel, which once justified holding common carriers to an implied contract implied contract n. an agreement which is found to exist based on the circumstances when to deny a contract would be unfair and/or result in unjust enrichment to one of the parties. An implied contract is distinguished from an "express contract. of safe passage, no longer exist. "That rationale has long since become outdated as public conveyances like trains, planes, and boats have become at least as safe as private modes of travel," Titone wrote. "Moreover, even if travel by common carrier could still fairly be regarded as especially hazardous activity . . . the risks arising from the independent nonwork-related tortious Wrongful; conduct of such character as to subject the actor to civil liability under Tort Law. In order to establish that a particular act was tortious, a plaintiff must prove that an actionable wrong existed and that damages ensued from that wrong. actions of an employee are unrelated to the hazards of travel and, in fact, are essentially the same regardless of whether the individual is hurtling through a subway tunnel or is instead leisurely sipping a cup of coffee in a quiet restaurant." The decision may create a ripple effect ripple effect Epidemiology See Signal event. across the nation, according to Lawrence Heisler, who represented the New York City Transit Authority in the case. He noted that while most states still recognize the rule, the Adams court's reasoning may prove persuasive. "I think it will make the other jurisdictions take a second look at the absolute liability doctrine, which has been applied in some states to defendants other than carriers, like ambulance owners and hospitals. Some states that have adopted the rule might junk it," Heisler said. The case arose from an alleged assault on Margaret Adams at a New York City subway The New York City Subway is a rapid transit system owned by the City of New York and leased to the New York City Transit Authority , an affiliate of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and also known as MTA New York City Transit. station. Adams sued the Transit Authority, claiming that a token booth clerk verbally and physically attacked her after she asked the clerk for directions. Finding the common carrier rule "no longer viable as a matter of law or policy," the New York high court concluded "that the token booth clerk's assaultive as·saul·tive adj. Inclined to or suggestive of violent attack: "The reduction of cinema to assaultive images ... has produced a disincarnated, lightweight cinema that doesn't demand anyone's full attention" conduct, which was indisputably outside the scope of her employment, does not give rise to vicarious liability on the part of her employer." |
|
||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion