Chu v. Fiala

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chu v. Fiala

117 A.D.3d 585, 986 N.Y.S.2d 105

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 20, 2014

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 117 A.D.3d 585 (Chu v. Fiala) 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

Chu v. Fiala, 117 A.D.3d 585, 986 N.Y.S.2d 105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Department of Motor Vehicles Appeals Board, which after a hearing, suspended petitioner’s driver’s license for 31 days based on a violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Carol E. Huff, J.], entered September 27, 2013), dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence supports the determination (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]). Such evidence, including eyewitness [586]*586testimony, shows that petitioner failed to exercise due care, and struck the pedestrian as she crossed the street, ultimately resulting in the pedestrian’s death (see e.g. Matter of Montagnino v Fiala, 106 AD3d 1090 [2d Dept 2013]).

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Andrias, Saxe and Clark, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Department of Motor Vehicles Appeals Board, which after a hearing, suspended petitioner’s driver’s license for 31 days based on a violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Carol E. Huff, J.], entered September 27, 2013), dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence supports the determination (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]). Such evidence, including eyewitness [586]*586testimony, shows that petitioner failed to exercise due care, and struck the pedestrian as she crossed the street, ultimately resulting in the pedestrian’s death (see e.g. Matter of Montagnino v Fiala, 106 AD3d 1090 [2d Dept 2013]).

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Andrias, Saxe and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 585, 986 N.Y.S.2d 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chu-v-fiala-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack