Source: https://mdafny.com/lawyer/Manuel-R.-Reynoso_cp13075.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 11:06:04+00:00

Document:
MANUEL R. REYNOSO has worked exclusively in the civil litigation field since his graduation from law school. He became associated with Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley in February of 2001 and became a partner in 2013. Mr. Reynoso has obtained numerous defendants’ verdicts and dismissals at trial in premises, motor vehicle and general liability cases in Bronx, Kings, New York and Queens Counties. Mr. Reynoso was born in the Dominican Republic and is fluent in Spanish.
MANGIONE v. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUS CO. and CAESAR RUSSO, Supreme Court, Queens County - obtained a defendant's verdict in a motor vehicle accident case in which plaintiff, a passenger of a transit bus, alleged that she fell to the bus’s floor when bus driver abruptly stopped. She claimed injuries of her back, knee, neck, shoulder and thumb, which resulted in 6 separate surgeries. Plaintiff sued the bus driver and the MTA Bus Co. alleging driver negligence and the MTA’s vicarious liability. She sought recovery of approximately $5 million for future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel contended that MTA bus was not liable for the accident and that plaintiff’s injuries were caused by a prior motor vehicle accident.
ROQUE v. MTA BUS CO., Supreme Court, Queens County - obtained a defendant's verdict in a motor vehicle accident case in which plaintiff slipped and fell stepping off of a transit bus. She alleged that bus driver did not let her off at a safe place. The abutting property owner was also sued for the allegedly defective condition which caused her fall. As a result of her fall she fractured her ankle and had open reduction internal fixation surgery on the ankle. Defense counsel contended that MTA bus was not liable for the accident.
RAMNANDAN v. GATEWAY SECURITY and MTA BUS CO., Supreme Court, New York County - obtained a defendant's verdict in a motor vehicle accident case in which plaintiff, a passenger on a transit bus, alleged that she was injured when the bus collided head on with a van owned and operated by the co-defendant. She claimed injuries of her back, which resulted in a laminectomy. Plaintiff sued the bus driver, MTA Bus Co. and the owner and operator of the other vehicle alleging driver negligence and vicarious liability of the vehicle owners. She sought recovery of approximately $3 million for future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel contended that MTA bus was not liable for the accident.
AHMED v. MTA, ET AL., Supreme Court, Queens County - obtained a defendant's verdict in a motor vehicle accident case in which plaintiff, a bus passenger, contended that the bus came to an abrupt and violent stop, resulting in her fall. Plaintiff claimed that she sustained injuries to her back and right shoulder, which resulted in arthroscopic surgery. The bus driver died prior to trial. In his EBT, he denied that any untoward events had occurred. The defendant further contended that the jury should consider that the plaintiff's testimony that she slid a very significant portion along the floor after falling was inherently unbelievable and that her position should be rejected.
SUKHRAN v. NYCTA, Supreme Court, Bronx County - obtained a defendant's verdict in a motor vehicle accident case in which plaintiff was operating a vehicle that collided with the driver side rear of a transit bus while the bus was turning into an intersection. He contended that the bus operator was negligent. Plaintiff claimed that he sustained an injury to his knee, which resulted in arthroscopic surgery. The defendant contended that plaintiff’s version of the accident did not make sense and that the bus driver did not operate his bus in a negligent manner .
ALLEN v. NYCTA, Supreme Court, New York County - represented the Transit Authority in a subway accident case in which plaintiff claimed that she was caused to fall when the train suddenly and violently moved after it had come to a stop. Plaintiff claimed that she sustained injuries to her neck and back, which caused her to miss a significant amount of time from work following the accident. The defendant contended that that plaintiff was comparatively negligent for failing to make use of available handrails. The plaintiff brought an independent witness to trial who supported her version of the accident. The defendant further contended that plaintiff’s injuries were minor and had resolved. At verdict, plaintiff was found 45% comparatively negligent and was awarded $20,000 for past pain and suffering, $0 for future pain and suffering, and $12,594.46 for medical expenses, for a total award of $17,926.95.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.