Clinger v. New York City Transit AuthorityClinger v. New York City Transit Authority
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, defendant’s motion for summary judgment granted, the complaint dismissed and the certified question answered in the negative.
On March 20, 1991, plaintiff was attacked as she walked at rush hour through an isolated and little-used subway tunnel. At the time of this incident, the tunnel was undergoing
Whether the Authority is shielded from liability depends on whether in this instance it acted in a governmental or a proprietary role
(see, Weiner v Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 55
NY2d 175). In
Miller v State of New York
(
Moreover, plaintiffs claim is independently, and fatally, flawed by her inability to establish that the location of the metal plate, rather than the general lack of security in the tunnel, was the proximate cause of her injuries. Two previous rapes, and an incident of sexual abuse, had occurred in the tunnel prior to this attack, all in the absence of any negligently placed construction materials. Plaintiffs claim is so speculative on the issue of causation as to mandate dismissal as a matter of law
(see, Matter of Crichlow v New York City
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed, with costs, defendant’s motion for summary judgment granted, complaint dismissed and certified question answered in the negative, in a memorandum.