MTA is Not Vicariously Liable for the Torts of its Subsidiaries

In the matter of Chen v. Metropolitan Transit Authority (2025 NY Slip Op 03301), the Appellate Division, Second Department, recently affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, which dismissed the complaint as against the Metropolitan Transit Authority (“MTA”). The case arose from an incident in which the plaintiff allegedly sustained injuries while riding a bus that suddenly accelerated and then abruptly stopped. The plaintiff alleged that the MTA or its agents were responsible for operating or maintaining the bus.

The MTA moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), arguing that it could not be held liable because it neither owns nor operates buses. The Supreme Court granted that branch of the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

On appeal, the Second Department upheld the dismissal, reiterating long-standing precedent that the MTA’s functions are limited to financing and planning – not the direct operation, control, or maintenance of transit vehicles or facilities. The Court held: “It is well settled, as a matter of law, that the functions of the MTA with respect to public transportation are limited to financing and planning, and do not include the operation, maintenance, and control of any facility.” The Court further noted that the bus involved was owned and operated by MTA Bus Company, a separate legal entity and subsidiary of the MTA.

The decision also made clear that “the MTA is not vicariously liable for the torts of its subsidiaries such as MTA Bus Company,” and that the MTA and its subsidiaries “must be sued separately” as they are “not responsible for each other’s torts.” Therefore, the plaintiff failed to assert a legally cognizable claim against the MTA.

Accordingly, the Court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint as against the MTA.

Salvatore R. Marino, Esq.