Bethel v. New York City Transit Authority

Facts

Bethel boarded a New York City Transit Authority M5 bus in midtown Manhattan on June 19, 1989. He sat in a seat directly opposite the rear door, which was called the "wheelchair accessible seat" at trial. A lever under the seat let it fold up against the sidewall to make room for a wheelchair. At other times it stayed horizontal for ordinary seating. Bethel said the seat collapsed the moment he sat down. He fell to the floor and badly injured his back. After the accident, a Transit Authority inspection found the seat at a slightly elevated angle, and it could not be returned to a fully horizontal position. When the inspector tried to adjust it, a hinge broke and the seat collapsed. Bethel had no evidence that the Transit Authority actually knew the seat could collapse. He relied on constructive notice, meaning notice the law attributes to a party because a reasonable inspection would have found the defect. His proof was a computer repair record for the bus. It showed two notations that, 11 days before the accident, repairs (adjustment and alignment) were made to a "Lift Wheelchair." He argued those repairs were to this seat and that a proper inspection then would have revealed the defect.

Issues

1. Should a common carrier's duty of the highest degree of care continue to be applied as a matter of law, or is a common carrier held to the ordinary standard of reasonable care?
2. Was the trial court's instruction on the carrier's duty of the highest care harmless error, or did it require a new trial?

Holding

The rule that a common carrier owes a duty of extraordinary care is no longer viable. Because the jury was charged on the highest degree of care when deciding constructive notice of the defective seat, the error was not harmless, and a new trial was required.