Barnes v. Lee

158 A.D.2d 414, 551 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1879
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 22, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 158 A.D.2d 414 (Barnes v. Lee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barnes v. Lee, 158 A.D.2d 414, 551 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

The instant action arises out of a three-car automobile accident that occurred on August 13, 1983. A vehicle operated by defendant Lee, proceeding southbound on the Bruckner Expressway, was brought to a complete stop behind a disabled vehicle. Several seconds later, plaintiff’s vehicle also came to a complete stop behind Lee’s, only to be rear-ended by a third vehicle, driven by defendant Wilson Segarra. The force of the impact caused plaintiff’s vehicle to be pushed forward into defendant Lee’s vehicle.

While negligence cases do not generally lend themselves to resolution by a motion for summary judgment, such a motion will be granted where, as here, the facts clearly point to the negligence of one party without any culpable conduct by the other (Morowitz v Naughton, 150 AD2d 536). Even if it were to be assumed that defendant’s actions were somehow improper, plaintiff still bears the responsibility of demonstrating that defendant Lee’s negligence was a substantial cause of the events which produced the injury (Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308, 315, rearg denied 52 NY2d 784, 829).

The instant record reveals that defendant Segarra was undeniably responsible for causing the accident, while defendant Lee was in no position to take any steps to either reasonably foresee or avoid the rear-end collision (see, Ventricelli v Kinney Sys. Rent A Car, 45 NY2d 950). Since plaintiff failed to establish the existence of a material, triable issue of fact, summary judgment was properly granted to defendant Lee. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Smith and Rubin, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Villaruel v. Consolidated El. Serv. Corp.
2024 NY Slip Op 32404(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2024)
Biddy v. Vanmaltke
67 A.D.3d 845 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Burns v. Gonzalez
307 A.D.2d 863 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Martin v. Savage
299 A.D.2d 903 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Brenner v. Leo
288 A.D.2d 414 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Piotrowski v. Nye
262 A.D.2d 991 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Centeno v. Goldstein
261 A.D.2d 566 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Fiscella v. Gibbs
261 A.D.2d 572 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Attilio v. Gladstone
174 Misc. 2d 759 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1997)
Yusupov v. Supreme Carrier Corp.
240 A.D.2d 660 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Rios v. Bryant
234 A.D.2d 441 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Murphy v. Spickler
224 A.D.2d 814 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Flores v. Pharmakitis
209 A.D.2d 205 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Smith v. Cafiero
203 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
158 A.D.2d 414, 551 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnes-v-lee-nyappdiv-1990.