High Court to take on NJ Transit immunity
Agency seeks dismissal of pair of injury lawsuits
By: Colleen Wilson
NorthJersey.com
USA Today Network - New Jersey
..... The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments in a case involving whether NJ Transit can be sued in certain circumstances.
......
The central question the supreme Court will consider is whether NJ Transit is an "arm of the State of New Jersey for interstate sovereign immunity purposes," said the order posted July 3, [2025] Courts from two states have made opposite rulings on the issue.
..... A date for oral arguments has not yet been set, but they could take place this winter. [2025-2026]
..... There are two cases at the center of the matter before the Supreme Court.
.....
One was filed in New York in 2017 after Jeffrey Colt was allegedly injured by an NJ Transit bus as he walked in a crosswalk on 40th Street in Manhattan.
..... The other was filed in Pennsylvania in 2018 after Cedric Galette, the passenger in a vehicle parked on Market Street in Philadelphia was allegedly injured when an NJ Transit bus struck the parked vehicle.
..... NJ Transit ultimately argued in both cases that the agency is an "arm of the state," or - as it was phrased in the Colt case - NJ Transit is "the alter ego of New Jersey." as an "arm of the state," NU Transit said, it is entitled to sovereign immunity that would protect it from "private suits brought in courts of other states." a panel of judges in Pennsylvania's Superior Court agreed with NJ Transit's :sovereign immunity: argument, but New York's Court of Appeals disagreed.
..... NJ Transit was crated via the Public Transportation Act of 1979, which rads, "The corporation is hereby constituted as an instrumentality of the state exercising public and essential governmental functions." The agency provides bus, train and light rail and transpiration services for seniors and those with disabilities throughout New Jersey and in New York and Pennsylvania.
..... "The conflict is simple: Two state high courts came to diametrically opposing views on a single state-created entity's immunity within months," wrote Jermy Feigenbuam, a solicitor general with the New Jersey Attorney General;s Office who coordinated the office's involvement with the Supreme Court.
..... "This court's guidance is needed," Feigenbaum wrote.