Bethel v. New York City Transit Authority – Case Brief
Summary of Bethel v. New York City Transit Authority, 703 N.E.2d 1214 (1998).
Facts: Bethel (P) was riding on a New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA, D) bus and sustained personal injuries when the wheelchair accessible seat collapsed beneath him. Bethel could not prove that the defendant actually knew of the defect. Plaintiff relied on a theory of constructive notice and offered as evidence a computer printout of a repair record that showed that the seat had been fixed or adjusted recently and that a proper inspection would have revealed the defect that was responsible for the collapse of the seat. The court instructed the jury with the highest standard of care owed by a common carrier. The court entered judgment in favor of Bethel under the constructive notice theory and the Appellate Division affirmed without addressing the standard of care. The NYCTA appealed.
Issue: What is the duty owed by a common carrier?
Holding and Rule: The duty owed by a common carrier is the objective reasonable person standard. That standard, which is based on a relative sliding scale of the factual situation and how a reasonable person will act under the same or similar facts is itself flexible enough to permit courts and juries to fully take into account any ultrahazardous nature of a tortfeasor’s activity. Thus the old rule is no longer viable and a common carrier should merely be held to the same standard of care of the reasonable person.
Disposition: Remanded for a new trial.
Notes: This case overturns the former high standard of care owed by common carriers.
See Indiana Harbor Belt R.R. Co. v. American Cyanamid Co. for a law school torts case brief in which the Seventh Circuit held that a common carrier is held to a negligence standard with regard to a spill of a hazardous chemical during shipment.