Summary
In Goldstein v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad Co., 155 Misc.2d 1, 2, 597 N.Y.S.2d 258, 258 (N.Y.Sup.App. Term 1993), aff'd, 207 A.D.2d 723, 616 N.Y.S.2d 595 (1st Dep't 1994), an appellate court reversed an order denying summary judgment to defendant where defendant's employees had removed plaintiff from a train, after he had refused to leave, upon failing to pay a one-way fare.
Summary of this case from Decker v. CampusOpinion
January 14, 1993
Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, Laura Jacobson, J.
Brody Fabiani, New York City (Ellen S. Davis and Roger K. Solymosy of counsel), for appellants.
Berman, Paley, Goldstein Kannry, New York City (David R. Paley of counsel), for respondent.
Order entered August 13, 1991 reversed, with $10 costs, defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint dismissed.
The plaintiff's admitted refusal to pay the one-way fare or leave the commuter train — conduct which resulted in a delay of approximately 25 minutes to the other passengers — provided a lawful basis to arrest plaintiff for disorderly conduct (see, Matter of Charles M., 143 A.D.2d 96) or theft of services (see, Burroughs v New York City Tr. Auth., 112 A.D.2d 186). That plaintiff may have felt aggrieved because monthly commutation tickets were unavailable for purchase on the day involved (a Sunday) does not render actionable the otherwise lawful conduct of the defendant railroad company's employees in removing plaintiff from the train and effectuating his arrest (see, Monnier v New York Cent. Hudson Riv. R.R. Co., 175 N.Y. 281). Where, as here, the facts leading up to the arrest are undisputed, the existence of probable cause is for the court to determine as a matter of law (Veras v Truth Verification Corp., 87 A.D.2d 381, 384, affd 57 N.Y.2d 947).
PARNESS, J.P., MILLER and McCOOE, JJ., concur.