A New York appellate court recently ruled against Craig Bazarewski, who sought damages for personal injuries he sustained from tripping in a pothole near the Long Island Railroad (LIRR) station in Ronkonkoma. The decision, made on June 3, 2026, by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, affects not only Bazarewski but also sets a precedent for similar cases involving injuries in public areas maintained by multiple entities.
The court's ruling is significant because it clarifies the responsibilities of property owners and municipalities regarding safety in areas frequented by the public. This case highlights the complexities of liability when multiple transportation services operate in the same vicinity.
Background
The case, titled Bazarewski v. Town of Islip, was filed under docket number 2024-10375. Craig Bazarewski, the appellant, claimed he suffered injuries after tripping in a pothole located in a parking lot adjacent to the Ronkonkoma LIRR station. The defendants in the case included the Long Island Railroad, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), the Town of Islip, and the County of Suffolk.
Bazarewski's complaint alleged that the defendants were responsible for maintaining the parking lot and ensuring it was safe for use. The case reached the appellate court after the Supreme Court of Suffolk County granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, dismissing Bazarewski's claims against them. This ruling prompted Bazarewski to appeal, seeking to overturn the decision.
The Ruling
The Appellate Division, which included Justices Colleen D. Duffy, Francesca E. Connolly, Laurence L. Love, and Susan Quirk, upheld the lower court's decision. The court ruled that the MTA defendants were not liable for Bazarewski's injuries because the parking lot was part of a multi-carrier facility, which included Suffolk County Transit buses. The court stated, "the MTA defendants established, prima facie, that the parking lot where the plaintiff's accident occurred also served Suffolk County Transit buses and was therefore part of a multi-carrier facility."
Additionally, the court found that the Town of Islip and the County of Suffolk had enacted prior written notice laws, which require municipalities to receive written notice of any defects before they can be held liable for injuries. The court noted, "Once a municipality establishes that it lacked prior written notice of an alleged defect, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate that a question of fact exists as to one of the exceptions to the prior written notice requirement." In this case, Bazarewski failed to provide evidence that either exception applied.
Impact
This ruling has implications for future personal injury cases involving public transportation facilities and municipal liability. It reinforces the importance of prior written notice laws, which protect municipalities from liability unless they have been formally notified of a hazardous condition. This ruling may deter future claims against municipalities and transit authorities unless plaintiffs can meet the stringent requirements outlined by the court.
Furthermore, the decision clarifies the responsibilities of common carriers like the MTA when it comes to maintaining safety in areas used by passengers. The court's interpretation of the law indicates that common carriers may not be liable for injuries in areas that serve multiple transportation providers, which could limit the scope of liability in similar cases.
What's Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Bazarewski plans to appeal the ruling to a higher court. However, the decision sets a precedent that may affect how future personal injury claims are handled in New York, particularly in cases involving public transportation facilities.