LIRR Commuters' Suit May Continue Without Claim Notice, Judge Finds
Just as riding the Long Island Rail Road commuter train requires a ticket, bringing tort or contract claims against it typically requires a claim notice.
July 13, 2018 at 05:14 PM
3 minute read
LIRR riders waiting for a train. Photo from court document Just as riding the Long Island Rail Road commuter train requires a ticket, bringing tort or contract claims against it typically requires a claim notice. But the plaintiffs in a proposed class action taking the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to task for bad service on the LIRR have found an alternate route—a narrow “public interest” exception to the requirement. The suit, filed last year during what Gov. Andrew Cuomo dubbed the “summer of hell” for frustrated straphangers as crews commenced track work at Penn Station in Manhattan, alleges that chronically delayed and cancelled trains have gotten the plaintiffs in trouble with their bosses, made them miss job interviews and caused them emotional and physical distress. The conditions are also putting commuters' lives at risk, said plaintiffs' attorney Paul Liggieri of the Derek Smith Law Group, himself a Long Island resident and an LIRR rider who says delays cause train platforms to become dangerously crowded, increasing the risk that someone could fall into the train bed. The MTA moved to dismiss the suit, asserting sovereign immunity and that the plaintiffs didn't take the usual step of serving a notice of claim. Nassau County Supreme Court Justice Antonio Brandveen agreed with the MTA that the lack of claim notice should be grounds for dismissing the plaintiffs' intentional infliction of emotional distress claim. But the judge said he agreed with the plaintiffs' argument that their breach of carriage contract and negligence claims should be subject to a public interest exception to the requirement, a “slim reed” created through appellate case law. Brandveen found that the plaintiffs seek to vindicate the public's interest that the MTA is following state statute requiring it to operate “safe and adequate” facilities and set a hearing to schedule discovery in the case; the MTA can reassert its sovereign immunity defense in a summary judgment motion, the judge said. Liggieri said he pushed for the public interest exception instead of litigating the notice of claim because “time is of the essence” to protect LIRR riders and that he saw the former as the quicker route. “I knew I had to file immediately to get answers from the LIRR,” he said. Liggieri also said he sees the ruling as potentially opening door for additional straphangers who are fed up with other New York City metro area commuter trains like the Metro North and the Amtrak from New Jersey.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNY's Top Court Mulls Fate of Personal Injury Claims Against NJ Transit Corp.
Amendments to Federal Lawsuit Against BusPatrol Prompts Call for Rule 11 Sanctions
After DOJ Smackdowns Leave JetBlue Spiraling, Longtime GC Heads for Exit
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250