Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND ANNA BLAKE, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) ) BELL'S TRUCKING, INC., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________)

Civ No.: JFM 99-11

MEMORANDUM This action, brought by Anna Blake and her husband Lawrence Blake ("plaintiffs") against Bell's Trucking, Inc. and Bell's Bus Services, Inc. ("defendants"), arises out of a slip and fall accident. Plaintiffs have brought suit for negligence, breach of contract, and loss of consortium. Defendants have filed a motion in limine to exclude the testimony of plaintiff's expert and a motion for summary judgment. The motion in limine will be granted.1 The motion for summary judgment will be granted. I. Plaintiffs were part of a choral group that traveled on defendants' bus from Dundalk, Maryland to the Pines Resort Hotel ("the hotel') in South Fallsburg, New York on January 5, 1996. The hotel is a ski resort in the Catskill Mountains.2 It began to snow several hours before the bus reached the hotel. The bus pulled into a covered driveway area under the hotel. The driveway cuts through the ground floor of the hotel. The covered driveway, which is maintained by Pines Resort, is open on two ends,

1

I need not reach all of the issues presented in the motion in limine. The hotel is not a party to this suit. 1

2

but it is protected by the hotel on the other two sides and above. (See Def. Ex.#5.) Bart Rasnick, director of hotel security, testified that the area under the covered driveway was where bus drivers, at the direction of hotel personnel, usually stopped to unload passengers during the winter. (See Rasnick Dep. at 26-27.) Outside of the covered driveway, the ground, including the road, was covered in snow. (See, e.g., Mrs. Blake Dep. at 30.) Under the covered driveway, there was some snow and ice, but it was more clear than outside of the covered driveway. (See id.) The bus stopped several feet from the curb on the driver's right-hand side. On that side, the bus door faced the hotel fitness center. The record reflects that several cars were parked or temporarily stopped in between where the bus stopped and the curb in front of the fitness center. On the other side of the covered driveway was the a door marked "Hotel Registration." Several passengers heard the bus driver say "be careful," as they began to disembark. Several other passengers, including Mrs. Blake, testified that they did not hear this warning. Mrs. Blake was approximately the fifth passenger off the bus. She took several steps, slipped, and fell. She broke her hip, which necessitated three operations and cost $90,000 in medical bills. II. Under New York law, a common carrier owes a duty to an alighting passenger to stop at a place where the passenger may safely disembark and leave the area. See, e.g., Miller v. Fernan, 534 N.E.2d 40, 41 (N.Y. 1988); Blye v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Auth., 511 N.Y.S.2d 612, _, 124 A.D.2d 106, 109 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987) aff'd by 528 N.E.2d 1225 (N.Y.

2

1988). Once a safe alighting point is provided, the operator's duty is completed.3 Blye, 124 A.D.2d at 109. "Only when the placement of the bus dictates that the passenger navigate a treacherous path should the public carrier be held liable for any injuries proximately caused by that hazardous condition." Connolly v. Rogers, 599 N.Y.S.2d 731, 732-33 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). Common carriers do not have an absolute duty to prevent any injury to alighting passengers. See, e.g., Blye, 124 A.D.2d at 114. New York law does not require that the area where passengers disembark "be in such a condition as to render it impossible for a passenger to slip or become injured." Id. In analyzing a common carrier's duty during snowy and icy conditions, courts consider whether the bus stopped at the most clear area. For example, in Hickey v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Auth., at the time that the plaintiff disembarked, a small amount of snow had recently fallen. 558 N.Y.S.2d 543, 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990). The bus driver stopped at an area where several inches of snow and ice from an earlier storm had not been cleared. Id. Another area at the same bus stop had been cleared of the earlier snow. Id. The court upheld a jury verdict for the plaintiff because, "the jury could have concluded that [the bus driver] was negligent in discharging plaintiff at a location where she was forced to tread a dangerous path, rather than in proximity to the corner or the bus shelter, where the snow from the [earlier] storm had been cleared." Id. (emphasis added). Similarly, in Schwartz v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp., a trolley car stopped over a patch of ice. 36 N.Y.S.2d

The duty may extend for several steps if the plaintiff alights directly onto a hazardous condition or is forced to navigate a treacherous path. See, e.g., id. at 110-11. The extent of the duty does not matter here as Mrs. Blake disembarked in the most safe available area. 3

3

70, 70-71 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942). The court noted that there were other nearby places that were free of ice. Id. at 70-71. The court held that the defendant's negligence was a question of fact. Id. at 7071. In Hickey and Schwartz, whether the common carrier breached its duty was a jury question in part because the place where it chose for the passengers to alight was not the most safe. In contrast to Hickey and Schwartz, the record in this case indicates that the bus driver chose the most clear area

Download Anna Blake, et al v Bell's Trucking Inc, et al.pdf

Maryland Law