| Bumpus v New York City Tr. Auth. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 00213 [47 AD3d 653] |
| January 15, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Tracy Bumpus, Respondent, v New York City TransitAuthority, Appellant, et al., Defendant. |
—[*1] Robert Bacigalupi, New York, N.Y. (Matthew Carmody of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City TransitAuthority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hinds-Radix, J.), datedJuly 11, 2007, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaintinsofar as asserted against it for failure to state a cause of action.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
On a motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), the complaint must beliberally construed. All allegations contained in it must be accepted as true, and the plaintiff mustbe accorded "the benefit of every possible favorable inference" (Leon v Martinez, 84NY2d 83, 87 [1994]). The appropriate inquiry is whether the complaint, so viewed, states " 'insome recognizable form any cause of action known to our law' " (Antico v Richmond Hous.Assoc., 196 AD2d 853 [1993], quoting Dulberg v Mock, 1 NY2d 54, 56 [1956];see Manno v Mione, 249 AD2d 372 [1998]).
A necessary element of a cause of action alleging negligent retention or negligent supervisionis that the "employer knew or should have known of the employee's propensity for the conductwhich caused the injury" (Kenneth R. v Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, 229 AD2d159, 161 [1997], cert denied 522 US 967 [1997]; see Peter T. v Children's Vil., Inc., 30 AD3d 582, 586 [2006];Well v Yeshiva Rambam, 300 AD2d 580, 581 [2002]; Manno v Mione, 249AD2d at 373). Here, the plaintiff adequately pleaded causes of action to recover damages fornegligent retention and negligent [*2]supervision. In addition, theplaintiff adequately pleaded a cause of action alleging negligent training. Thus, the SupremeCourt properly denied the appellant's motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted againstit for failure to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]). Crane, J.P., Rivera, Florioand Balkin, JJ., concur.