Guy J. Levasseur

Noelle Robinson (Of Counsel-White Plains, NY) and New York partners Guy Levasseur and Thomas Comer defended a NY county, transit operators, and bus driver in a personal injury case with a potential value in excess of $5 million. The plaintiff alleged a fall on a transit bus, from which he initially claimed cervical, lumbar, and right knee complaints treated with injections, but later claimed a traumatic brain injury and cognitive impairments, as well as a permanent inability to work. The plaintiff refused to settle, and the case was set to go to trial in January. Noelle filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff was not able to establish that the braking of the bus was unusual or violent. In its Decision and Order, the court found it persuasive that even in his inconsistent testimony, plaintiff admitted that the bus was “moving very slowly” when the alleged incident occurred. The driver confirmed at deposition that he slowed upon observing the brake lights of the vehicle in front of the bus, and that the passenger reported at the time that he did not need medical attention. The decision determined that our clients were entitled to judgment as a matter of law in that the bus was not caused to move in an unusual or violent manner, agreeing that the plaintiff provided no objective evidence of any movement of the bus other than “the jerks and jolts commonly experienced in city bus travel,” despite the plaintiff’s disclosure of an expert with decades of experience, to assert that the bus violated national standards for “jerk rates,” and that the plaintiff raised no triable issue of fact.

New York City Of Counsel Saige Subick and Partner Guy Levasseur obtained summary judgment for our private-sector transit operator client on liability dismissing a New York state court case in which a bus passenger claimed catastrophic injuries after a bus stopped suddenly when cut off by a vehicle that fled the scene. The court found Saige and Guy met the burden of proof in showing an emergency doctrine situation existed as a result of the actions of the non-party vehicle. Saige appeared for oral argument three separate times for several hours overall, as there were multiple judges who were assigned to the case. The plaintiff alleged a shoulder injury and a stroke such that he has not worked since April 2021. The potential exposure/sustainable value exceeded $3 million. The decision is even more rewarding as the plaintiff’s counsel had improperly moved for sanctions, preclusion, and to strike our answer for the alleged failure to provide all discovery sought (that motion was denied but only after more than a year of motion practice).

New York City partners Adam Guzik and Guy Levasseur obtained summary judgment for the firm’s client, the largest private-sector transit operator in North America, in New York Supreme Court, Nassau County. The matter involved a bus passenger who was injured when our client’s bus veered into a guardrail on the side of the road after a steering component failed. The court found Guy and Adam met the burden of proof in showing an emergency doctrine situation existed as a result of the sudden loss of steering with no notice, and where evidence in the form of more than 1,800 pages of maintenance records indicated the bus was well maintained. The plaintiff's expert report in opposition was deemed to be purely speculative. The sustainable verdict value at trial could have exceeded $3 million.