Friedman v. Rogerson

131 A.D.3d 1204, 16 N.Y.S.3d 770
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 30, 2015
Docket2014-09437
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 131 A.D.3d 1204 (Friedman v. Rogerson) 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
Friedman v. Rogerson, 131 A.D.3d 1204, 16 N.Y.S.3d 770 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.), entered August 21, 2014, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when she was struck by a vehicle owned by the defendant Randi Rogerson and operated by the defendant Richard Basso. The plaintiff established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability by presenting proof that she was struck while *1205 walking within an unmarked crosswalk, that she had observed the conditions of approaching traffic before she began to cross, and that the defendant driver was negligent in failing to yield the right-of-way (see Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1151, 1152 [a]; France Herly Bien-Aime v Clare, 124 AD3d 814, 814 [2015]; Garcia v Lenox Hill Florist III, Inc., 120 AD3d 1296, 1297 [2014]; Hamilton v King Tung Kong, 93 AD3d 821 [2012]; Rosenblatt v Venizelos, 49 AD3d 519 [2008]). In opposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Garcia v Lenox Hill Florist III, Inc., 120 AD3d at 1297; Rosenblatt v Venizelos, 49 AD3d 519 [2008]). Since the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the plaintiff’s prima facie showing, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Mastro, J.P., Cohen, Maltese and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Lu Yan Li v. Yong Hua Zhen
2024 NY Slip Op 05969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
Binger Mei v. Kim Wan Cheung
215 A.D.3d 909 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Gandarillas v. EAN Holdings, LLC
2017 NY Slip Op 5582 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
131 A.D.3d 1204, 16 N.Y.S.3d 770, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedman-v-rogerson-nyappdiv-2015.