Kolasa v. Ahmed

11 A.D.3d 394, 784 N.Y.S.2d 49, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12475
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 26, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 A.D.3d 394 (Kolasa v. Ahmed) 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
Kolasa v. Ahmed, 11 A.D.3d 394, 784 N.Y.S.2d 49, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12475 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Kibble F. Payne, J.), entered December 17, 2003, which, in an action for personal injuries arising out of a three-car accident, granted defendant-respondent’s motion to set aside the verdict apportioning li[395]*395ability 65% as against her and 35% as against appellants driver and owner of a taxi, vacated the jury’s apportionment of liability, dismissed the complaint as against defendant-respondent as a matter of law, and directed a trial on the issue of damages as between plaintiff and appellants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

No valid line of reasoning or permissible inferences could lead to the conclusion that defendant-respondent was at fault for this accident, given uncontroverted evidence that her vehicle was standing still at a traffic light with plaintiff in front of her when struck from behind by appellants’ vehicle, thereby being propelled into the rear of plaintiff’s car. Appellant taxi driver had been precluded from testifying, and appellants’ claims that defendant-respondent stopped short and/or collided with plaintiff before she herself was hit are utterly without evidentiary support and fail to rebut the presumption that the accident was caused by their negligence (see Burns v Gonzalez, 307 AD2d 863, 865 [2003], overruled in part on other grounds by Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648 [2004]; Mullen v Rigor, 8 AD3d 104 [2004]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Lerner, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Related

Rodriguez v. Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc.
44 A.D.3d 216 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 A.D.3d 394, 784 N.Y.S.2d 49, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kolasa-v-ahmed-nyappdiv-2004.