The opinion
Boumechal-Toro v City of New York
2024 NY Slip Op 31356(U)
April 19, 2024
Supreme Court, New York County
Docket Number: Index No. 150689/2023
Judge: James G. Clynes
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
State and local government sources, including the New
York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
publication.
INDEX NO. 150689/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/19/2024
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
NEW YORK COUNTY
PRESENT: HON. JAMES G. CLYNES PART 22M
Jmtice
------------- --- -------- --- ---------------- ------ --- --------------------- --- -----X INDEX NO. 150689/2023
ZUBEIDA ZENA BOUMECHAL-TORO,
MOTION DATE 05/08/2023
Plaintiff,
MOTION SEQ. NO. 001
- V -
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, HOYT TRANSPORTATION DECISION + ORDER ON
CORP., LUIS A. SANCHEZ MOTION
Defendants.
----- ---------- ------ ------------ ------ ------ --- --- -------- --- --- ---------- --- ---X
The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24,
25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43 .
were read on this motion to/for PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Upon the foregoing documents and following oral argument, it is ordered that Plaintiffs
motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants
Hoyt Transportation Corp (Hoyt) and Luis A. Sanchez (Sanchez) and "dismissing all affirmative
defenses alleging comparative fault on the part of Plaintiffs decedent" by Hoyt and Sanchez and
the cross-motion by Defendants The City of New York and The New York City Department of
Education (the City Defendants) is decided as follows:
Plaintiff commences this action as a result of an April 28, 2022 accident between Decedent-
Pedestrian Fahri Rochdi Boumechal and a motor vehicle owned by Defendant Hoyt and operated
by Defendant Sanchez. Plaintiff Zubeida Zena Boumechal-Toro was duly appointed as
Administrator of the Estate of Fahri Boumechal, deceased.
Plaintiff contends that Decedent was struck and killed by a yellow school bus owned by
Defendant Hoyt and operated by Defendant Sanchez while Decedent-pedestrian was crossing 2nd
Avenue. In support of Plaintiffs motion, Plaintiff relies on the affidavit of a witness, Austin Wu.
Wu avers that he was turning right onto 2 nd Avenue, observed Decedent crossing eastbound on
3 t 11 Street over 2nd Avenue, Decedent was more than halfway across the street within the crosswalk
150689/2023 BOUMECHAL-TORO, ZUBEIDA ZENA vs. THE CITY OF !'.EW YORK ET AL Page 1 of5
:\1otion \lo. 001
[* 1] 1 of 5
INDEX NO. 150689/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/19/2024
with the pedestrian countdown timer flashing and counting down, as a school bus turned left onto
2nd Avenue from 37 th Street, striking and knocking down pedestrian-Decedent. Wu also had a
dashcam on his vehicle and attached a video link which shows Decedent walking across the street
within the crosswalk, with pedestrian signal counting down, but does not show the impact
In opposition, Defendants contend that there are questions of fact with regard to the
Decedent's usage of a cell phone when the incident occurred. Defendants rely on the affidavit of
Defendant Driver Sanchez, in which he avers that he was the driver of the Hoyt Transportation
Corp. vehicle on the date of the subject accident, after the incident, he stopped his vehicle, exited,
and observed Decedent on the ground not moving, speaking, or making any sounds. Defendant
Sanchez further avers that he observed a cell phone on the ground near Decedent.
Defendants also submit the affidavit of Jessica Espinoza, Spanish interpreter, in which she
avers that she is a paralegal at the office of Silverman Shin & Byrne PLLC, she was requested to
interpret an affidavit for Luis A. Sanchez from English to Spanish, Sanchez appeared in her office,
she read the entire at1idavit to him in Spanish, and Sanchez acknowledged that the contents of the
affidavit were true to the best of his recollection.
Defendants contend that discovery must be completed to see if Decedent was using a cell
phone at the time of the accident because if Decedent was using his cell phone at the time of the
accident, then there is an issue of fact regarding culpable conduct.
In reply, Plaintiff contends that there is no evidence that Decedent was using a phone at
the time. For example, the phone could have fallen out of his pocket when he was struck. Plaintiff
further contends that Defendant Sanchez's affidavit is not in proper form because there is no draft
affidavit submitted in the witness' native language and included in the submission to the Court, so
the affidavit is inadmissible.
"The proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of
entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material
issues of fact from the case" (Wine grad v NY Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]). Once such
entitlement has been demonstrated by the moving party, the burden shifts to the party opposing
150689/2023 BOllMECHAL-TORO, ZlJBEIDA ZENA vs. THE CITY OF NEW YORK ET AL Page 2 of5
Motion No. 001
[* 2] 2 of 5
INDEX NO. 150689/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/19/2024
the motion to "demonstrate by admissible evidence the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial
of the action or tender an acceptable excuse for his failure ... to do [so]" (Zuckerman v New York,
49 NY2d 557 [1980]).
Plaintiff has established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of
liability. In opposition, Defendants have failed to raise an issue of fact. Defendants' contention
that Decedent's cell phone was found in the street, and thus he may have been distracted by it at
the time of the accident is speculative.
In support of their cross-motion, Defendants contend that neither City Defendant hold any
ownership interest in the school bus that was involved in the subject accident and are not
responsible for the alleged torts of other governmental departments nor those entities' independent
contractors. Defendants submit a signed "Contract Proposal,'' a certified police report, and an
affidavit from Chris J. Termini, President of Hoyt.
Defendants contend that the signed "Contract Proposal" establishes the relationship of
Hoyt being an independent contractor to the Board of Education, which currently operates under
the name Department of Education. This contract details all busing services, including ownership
of all equipment, employment of drivers and matrons and maintenance of all equipment, to be
solely the responsibility of Hoyt, as an independent contractor to the City Defendants.
The certified police report identifies that the bus is owned by Hoyt.
In his affidavit, Termini avers that the City Defendants do not directly provide any school
bus services: school bus services for New York City schoolchildren are carried out by private bus
companies serving as contractors for the New York City Department of Education (DOE); the City
Defendants are not parties to the contract; the bus involved in the accident was owned by Hoyt and
driven by Luis A. Sanchez; and it was operating the route pursuant to a contract between Hoyt and
the DOE. Termini further avers that the City Defendants did not employ Defendant Sanchez on
the date of the accident; they did not hire, train, supervise or direct the activities of Defendant
Sanchez; and they did not supervise or direct the activities by Hoyt on the date of the accident nor
did they own the subject school bus.
150689/2023 BOl!MECHAL-TORO, ZlJBEIDA ZENA vs. THE CITY OF NEW YORK ET AL Pagel of5
Motion No. 001
[* 3] 3 of 5
INDEX NO. 150689/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/19/2024
In opposition to the cross-motion, Plaintiff contends that if the Court accepts Termini's
affidavit as true, Plaintiff requests, in the alternative, a dismissal without prejudice of the causes
of action against the City Defendants, with leave to bring back either or both of those entities
should discovery yield new evidence and with all statutes of limitations defenses deemed waived.
In reply, Defendants contend that Plaintiff fails to raise an issue of fact. Defendants
contend that Hoyt is an independent contractor to the City Defendants and discovery would not
reveal any evidence leading to a liability finding on their part.
Defendants' cross-motion is granted without prejudice. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue ofliability in favor
of Plaintiff and against Defendants Hoyt Transportation Corp and Luis A. Sanchez and "dismissing
all affirmative defenses alleging comparative fault on the part of Plaintiffs decedent" by Hoyt and
Sanchez is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that the cross-motion by Defendants pursuant to CPLR 3212 dismissing the
complaint in its entirety against THE CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION on the grounds that they are improper parties to this action is
GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed as against said Defendants, without prejudice
of the causes of action against the City Defendants, with leave to bring back either or both of those
entities should discovery yield new evidence and with all statutes of limitations defenses deemed
waived; and it is further
ORDERED that and the Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly in favor of said
Defendants; and it is further
ORDERED that the action is severed and continued against the remaining Defendants;
and it is further
ORDERED that the caption be amended to reflect the dismissal and that all future papers
filed with the court bear the amended caption; and it is further
150689/2023 IHH:MECHAL-TORO, Zl!BEIDA ZENA vs. THE CrTV OF NEW YORK ET AL Page 4 of 5
Motiou No. 001
[* 4] 4 of 5
INDEX NO. 150689/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/19/2024
ORDERED that counsel for the moving party shall serve a copy of this order with Notice
of Entry upon the Clerk of the Court and the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office, who are directed
to mark the court's records to reflect the change in the caption herein; and it is further
ORDERED that such service upon the Clerk of the Court and the Clerk of the General
Clerk's Office shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on
Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the "E-
Filing" page on the court's website).
This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.
4/19/2024
DATE:
CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED NON-FINAL DISPOSITION
GRANTED □ DE'i!ED GRANTED IN PART □ OTHER
APPLICATION: SETfLE ORDER Sl:B\IIT ORDER
CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMEl'ff □ REFERENCE
!50689/2023 BOllMECHAL-TORO, Zl!BEJDA ZENA vs. THE CITY OF NEW YORK ET AL Pages of5
~lotion :'io. 001
[* 5] 5 of 5