Gonzalez v. Cruz

2024 NY Slip Op 02500

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: May 7, 2024
• Docket: Index No. 27185/20 Appeal No. 2209 Case No. 2023-06368
• Status: Published

Opinion

Gonzalez v Cruz (2024 NY Slip Op 02500)

Gonzalez v Cruz

2024 NY Slip Op 02500

Decided on May 07, 2024

Appellate Division, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: May 07, 2024
Before: Webber, J.P., Moulton, Friedman, González, Mendez, JJ.

Index No. 27185/20 Appeal No. 2209 Case No. 2023-06368

[*1]Leonardo Gonzalez, Appellant,

v

Angel Cruz et al., Respondents.

Law Office of Arnold E. DiJoseph, P.C., New York (Arnold DiJoseph, III of counsel), for appellant.

Law Office of John Trop, Tarrytown (Talay Hafiz of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered July 20, 2023, which denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability and to dismiss defendants' affirmative defense of comparative negligence, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff testified that while turning right in his vehicle from a designated right-turn lane, he was hit on the rear left side by defendant driver, who was making an illegal right turn from the center lane of traffic. In contrast, defendant testified that plaintiff was making an illegal right turn from a parking lane when their vehicles collided. This conflicting testimony created material issues of fact as to the cause of the accident (see Hernandez v Bestway Beer & Soda Distrib., 301 AD2d 381, 381 [1st Dept 2003]). The Google images of the accident location, captured roughly four months before the accident, were admissible, however the photos were not relevant as plaintiff submitted no evidence that they accurately depicted the location on the date of the accident (see Mercedes v 680 SN LLC, 210 AD3d 477, 478 [1st Dept 2022]; Williams v Laura Livery Corp., 173 AD3d 497, 498 [1st Dept 2019]).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: May 7, 2024