Nieves v. MABSTOA

In Nieves v. MABSTOA, 31 A.D.2d 359 (1st Dept 1969) a bus passenger sued the bus company, bus driver, and a motorist for injuries sustained in a bus-automobile accident. The bus was traveling on its regular route under elevated train tracks when a car operated by defendant Newsome, which had been traveling in the right or outer lane, suddenly cut into the path of the bus and was hit by the bus. The bus driver testified that he first saw Newsome's car as it was coming under the "el" four to six feet distant and about one second prior to impact. The Court found for the appellant bus company and driver, holding at 360 and 361: There is no doubt that the sudden unexpected swerving of the Newsome car into the path of the bus called for immediate action by the driver of the bus. On the evidence in the record the bus driver could not reasonably have been expected to anticipate the sudden turn of the Newsome car, hence it was such act by Newsome which proximately caused the accident... When the only evidence introduced clearly excludes negligence on the part of appellant, there is no basis upon which liability can be predicated, and no foundation or ground exists which warrants or supports rejection of the testimony.