Partner John Wynne Secures Another Dismissal for BMM Client.

Partner John V. Wynne secured another dismissal for a BMM client who operates buses in the City of New York. The plaintiff sued our client’s employee, a bus operator, alleging negligence which resulted in serious injuries to the plaintiff. By the time the plaintiff commenced suit, direct action against the bus company was already time-barred. 

Mr. Wynne immediately moved for dismissal, arguing that as an employee of the bus company, which is a Public Authority, the bus operator was entitled to application of the same abbreviated statute of limitations and therefore dismissal was warranted.   The court agreed and all claims were dismissed.  

Partner John Wynne Secured Dismissal of Case Where Bus Passenger Claimed Serious Injuries

Partner John V. Wynne secured a dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint where the plaintiff, a passenger on a bus operated by BMM’s client, claimed serious injuries due to the alleged negligent operation of the bus. The passenger initially sought leave of the court to serve a Notice of Claim upon the client after the statutory time limit had expired. Mr. Wynne successfully opposed that motion. Nevertheless, the passenger subsequently served a summons and complaint alleging compliance with the Notice of Claim requirements.  

Mr. Wynne immediately moved for dismissal citing the court’s previous denial of claimant’s motion, arguing that the allegations of compliance were false and the applicable statute of limitations for an action against a Public Authority has expired. The court agreed and dismissed all claims against BMM’s client.

Partner John Wynne Opposed Motion by Bus Passenger Who Claimed Severe Injuries

Partner John V. Wynne successfully opposed a motion by a bus passenger who claimed severe injuries and failed to serve a Notice of Claim in a timely manner. The plaintiff mistakenly served the pleading on a separate and unrelated entity and tried to correct the error after the time for such service expired.

Mr. Wynne successfully argued that since the plaintiff failed to report the accident when it happened, the municipal client was not given timely notice to commence an investigation and accordingly was severely prejudiced in its defense of this claim. The court agreed and denied the plaintiff’s motion to serve a late Notice of Claim, which is a required pleading that must be presented prior to service of a Summons and Complaint.

Partner John Wynne Obtained Dismissal of Case Where Bus Passenger Claimed Serious Injuries

Partner John V. Wynne obtained a dismissal of a case where a bus passenger claimed serious injuries due to an alleged “sudden stop” of our client’s bus. The plaintiff originally alleged that the accident occurred on May 15, 2017, and so alleged in the Notice of Claim, Summons, and Complaint and her deposition testimony. She later sought in 2023 to amend the pleadings to correct the date to June 24, 2017.  Arguing that this was an unreported claim when it happened, Mr. Wynne established that the municipal client was severely prejudiced by this late attempt to amend the pleadings.  The court agreed and denied plaintiff’s motion to amend while granting BMM’s motion to dismiss all claims.

Permanent Stay Granted Against Plaintiff Seeking Supplemental Coverage

Partner John Wynne was granted a permanent stay in an underinsured arbitration on behalf of the BMM client who was a defendant in the action. In this case, the plaintiff was a passenger at the time of an apparent vehicle collision. The plaintiff received a payment from the co-defendant’s policy and sought to obtain underinsured coverage from BMM’s client.

Plaintiff asserted a claim to recover SUM (supplemental uninsured/underinsured motorist) benefits on the grounds that the co-defendant's vehicle was underinsured, and argued that she was entitled to receive the difference between what was received and what the policy offered. Underinsured coverage is an elective that the BMM client does not provide. The plaintiff’s counsel argued that there was a public policy argument in favor of creating coverage where it did not exist.

A permanent motion to stay was granted in the client’s favor, as the client did not provide supplementary uninsured motorist coverage. The co-defendant had liability coverage and tendered its full policy amount. Due to Mr. Wynne’s efforts, the client resolved the claim in a timely manner without incurring coverage costs.

Partner John V. Wynne, Obtains Favorable Results on Behalf of BMM client, MTA Bus Company, in Two Contested High-Value Cases

The first lawsuit involved a 50-year-old male passenger, who was sitting on the bus when a concrete boom from an adjacent construction site struck the bus at a red light, resulting in a number of injuries to the plaintiff, including lumbar fusion surgery and ankle and knee arthroscopic surgery. The plaintiff alleged the bus operator was negligent in failing to prevent the accident and that he operated the bus in an unsafe manner. Although pressed to participate in early mediation, Mr. Wynne advised the other parties that we would be filing a motion for summary judgment and not contributing to a settlement. Plaintiff's counsel mediated with the codefendant, and the entire case was settled without any contribution from our client.

In the second case, Mr. Wynne secured a dismissal of all claims against the firm’s client MTA Bus Company. In this case, the 39-year-old plaintiff alleged traumatic brain injury caused by a vehicle collision. The plaintiff claimed that the bus operator drove the wrong way down a one-way street and hit a furniture delivery truck as it was backing up after going through a red light. As a result of the impact, the plaintiff was violently thrown from her seat into the interior surfaces of the bus, suffering multiple cognitive injuries. Video footage showed that the plaintiff was confirmed to be on the bus, although Mr. Wynne argued the bus had been stopped at a red light when the codefendant's truck backed into it. Furthermore, the plaintiff was confronted with evidence from her pre-accident medical records during her deposition, which undermined her claims concerning a causal connection. Ultimately, the case was settled in full by the codefendant, with no contribution from the firm's client, MTA Bus Company.

By developing these strategies with the client and strongly communicating our position to the other parties, Barry McTiernan & Moore obtained successful and early dismissal of the claims.

Partner John Wynne Achieves Summary Judgment and Dismissal on Behalf of Firm’s Client, MTA Bus Company

Partner John Wynne obtained summary judgment and dismissal of all claims in favor of the firm’s client, MTA Bus Company. The plaintiff alleged that she was a passenger on a bus which lurched forward and collided with another vehicle, resulting in back injuries that resulted in a spinal fusion. In this case, Mr. Wynne presented the testimony of the bus operator along with a video recording taken from the bus which demonstrated that the plaintiff and co-defendant vehicles’ claims that the bus abruptly entered traffic were false. The co-defendant, a motorist, told responding police that she swerved to avoid hitting the bus. Under cross-examination by Mr. Wynne, the co-defendant recanted her prior testimony and admitted to swerving to avoid another vehicle to her left while the client's bus was stationary. All claims against the MTA were dismissed as a result of the evidence and arguments presented by Mr. Wynne.

This is yet another successful result from Barry McTiernan & Moore, whose attorneys have a wide range of experience in high-profile and difficult liability cases.

Partner John V. Wynne Successfully Obtains Dismissal on behalf of Firm’s NYC Transportation Client

Barry McTiernan & Moore successfully obtained a dismissal of a lawsuit, where plaintiff’s counsel incorrectly pleaded the date of loss in the notice of claim and complaint against the firm’s client, MTA Bus Company. In this otherwise unreported accident, plaintiff’s counsel sought leave of the court to amend the pleadings to assert the correct date of loss more than two years after filing the initial complaint, and after most of the discovery had been completed. In opposition, BMM argued that when reviewing the data from the plaintiff's MetroCard, there was no proof of presence on the bus, and therefore the ability to conduct a meaningful investigation was denied to the client. Plaintiff's attempt to correct the pleadings more than two years later severely prejudiced the client's ability to investigate the claim within a reasonable period of time after the date of loss as required by Public Authorities Law. Following the court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion, Partner John V. Wynne then moved for dismissal of the complaint, which was granted in our client’s favor.