The state Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal of a $1.8 million verdict for a bus passenger who suffered permanent facial disfigurement after she was hit by a liquor bottle hurled by another rider.

New Jersey Transit was ordered to pay $1.8 million to Anasia Maison in 2017 for injuries suffered in an altercation with a group of unruly riders as their bus passed through Newark. But the Appellate Division in June ordered that a new jury should apportion the $1.8 million award between New Jersey Transit and the unidentified teenager who threw the bottle at her.

The Supreme Court said Dec. 10 that it will hear three issues related to the case: whether the jury should have been directed to allocate fault between New Jersey Transit and the person who threw the bottle; whether the common carrier standard of negligence applies to New Jersey Transit buses and drivers; and whether New Jersey Transit and the bus driver were immune under the Tort Claims Act.

The lawyer for Maison sought review of the allocation question. Lawyers for New Jersey Transit sought review on the common carrier standard and Tort Claims immunity issue.

Maison was riding a New Jersey Transit bus when a group of male teenagers began to direct profane comments and pelt her with objects. When one of the teens brandished a knife, Maison got up and changed seats. Bus driver Kelvin Coats, who witnessed the episode, said he did not intervene or call police because Maison did not ask for help and appeared to be handling herself well.

But when the teens exited the bus at their stop, one of them threw a liquor bottle at Maison, striking her forehead. She bled profusely and required 22 stitches to close up her wounds.

The jury found that the transit authority and the bus driver "fail[ed] to exercise a high degree of care in protecting plaintiff," and that "this failure proximately cause[d] plaintiff's injuries."

New Jersey Transit claimed at trial and before the Appellate Division that it should not be subject to the heightened standard of negligence for common carriers. The Appellate Division affirmed a finding below that New Jersey Transit is a common carrier, citing other public transit agencies that have termed themselves common carriers.

New Jersey Transit also claimed at trial and in papers filed with the Supreme Court that it was entitled to police-protection immunity, which aims to protect public entitles from liability for failing to protect from the criminal acts of third parties. It also claimed the bus driver's alleged failure to enforce the agency's own regulations also amounted to a failure to enforce the law, which is also immunized.

Maison's lawyer, K. Raja Bhattacharya of Bendit Weinstock in West Orange, declined to comment on the court's decision to hear the case. A spokesman for the Attorney General's Office, Lee Moore, also declined to comment.