The ruling by the state Court of Appeals Thursday makes Juan Soto a millionaire with $400,000 to spare. By a 4-to-3 vote, the judges concluded that Soto, who was 18 at the time of the 1997 incident, was "undeniably reckless" for walking near the electrified rails in Queens along the No. 7 line.
He and his pals thought they could outrun the train when they saw it coming. His pals made it; Soto didn't. His legs had to be amputated below the knee.
Soto's lawyers argued that their client could run as fast as 8 mph - an estimate based on how he once ran on a treadmill. Impossible to verify butÂ…
Based on that calculation, a Queens jury accepted the argument that the motorman had enough time to stop the train before striking Soto - even though he never should have been on the tracks.
"Individuals who put themselves in this type of position, and suffer injuries as a result, shouldn't be able to seek financial recovery from the public treasury," TA spokesman Charles Seaton said. "It's clear that he had no business on the roadbed."
Soto couldn't be reached for comment.
The TA had claimed that Soto had gone to a Manhattan bar with three pals, consuming six beers and a shot of whisky. BTW- Soto was 18 and the minimum Drinking age in New York at the time was 21.
Soto's lawyer, Brian Isaac, insisted there was no proof that Soto was drunk. Isaac conceded yesterday that his client may have had as many as seven drinks, but they were spread over at least seven hours.
In any case, Isaac said, the train's motorman, who gave inconsistent statements of his observations and actions, should have spotted Soto in time to stop his train, Isaac said. "It's the duty of any motorist to avoid preventable accidents," Isaac said.
According to court documents, Soto and his friends had been waiting for a train at Queensboro Plaza, but became convinced that the trains weren't running. Red tape was strung between platform pillars, suggesting that subway repairs were underway. The young men walked along a narrow path abutting the track called the catwalk. But as they neared the 40th St. station, a train materialized behind them. Hoping to reach the station first and board the train, the teens ran single file. Soto was struck.
A jury initially awarded Soto $1.4 million, finding the TA 75% at fault. An appellate court affirmed the decision by a 3-to-2 vote.
Writing for the majority, Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick indicated that the TA might have been cleared of responsibility if Soto's actions were a bit more egregious. Just to clarify, being drunk under the legal age limit and trying to outrun a train is not egregious behavior in New York. Maybe if he had his pants around his ankles it would be a different story. Ciparick cited a lawsuit filed more than two decades ago against a firecracker salesman. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an injured teenager, who was injured trying to make a pipe bomb with the firecrackers. Another lad with aspirations for the Darwin Achievement Award.
In a minority opinion, Judge Robert Smith asserted that Soto's own conduct was the sole legal cause of his injuries. "I think it is fair to say the plaintiff's injuries were entirely his own fault, even if a nonnegligent motorman might have been able to stop the train in time to avoid the accident," Smith wrote. "Anyone of normal human compassion will sympathize with plaintiff; TapÂ…TapÂ…nope my meter must be broke. he is not the only 18-year-old who ever acted recklessly, and he has paid a much higher price for it than most. "But I do not think it consistent with law or wise policy to hold, as the majority does, that the New York City Transit Authority must compensate him in part for his loss."
The TA wants state legislation that would make it tougher for such lawsuits to succeed, Seaton said.