Lilian C. v. State of New York

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: March 27, 2026
• Docket: 11 CA 25-00089
• Status: Published

Opinion

Lilian C. v State of New York (2026 NY Slip Op 01872)

Lilian C. v State of New York

2026 NY Slip Op 01872

Decided on March 27, 2026

Appellate Division, Fourth 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 on March 27, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CURRAN, MONTOUR, SMITH, AND GREENWOOD, JJ.

11 CA 25-00089

[*1]LILIAN C., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS GUARDIAN OF STEFANIE C., CLAIMANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT,

v

THE STATE OF NEW YORK, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. (CLAIM NO. 127148.)

SMITH, SOVIK, KENDRICK & SUGNET, P.C., SYRACUSE (STEVEN W. WILLIAMS OF COUNSEL), FOR CLAIMANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.

LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (OWEN DEMUTH OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

Appeal and cross-appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the Court of Claims (J. Scott Odorisi, J.), entered January 3, 2025. The interlocutory judgment apportioned liability 20% to defendant.

It is hereby ORDERED that the interlocutory judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Claimant commenced this action on behalf of herself and her daughter seeking damages for injuries that they sustained as passengers in a motor vehicle accident that occurred when the driver of another vehicle (nonparty driver) failed to yield the right- of-way and turned left in front of the vehicle that claimant and her daughter were in. Following a bifurcated nonjury trial on liability, the Court of Claims determined that defendant, State of New York (State), was 20% responsible and the nonparty driver was 80% responsible for the happening of the accident. Claimant appeals, and the State cross- appeals. We affirm.

The court concluded that the State failed to remedy a dangerous intersection condition, but the primary fault for the accident was the nonparty driver's failure to exercise enough caution under the circumstances. Contrary to the contentions of both claimant and the State, the court's apportionment of liability is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Destino v State of New York, 203 AD3d 1598, 1599- 1600 [4th Dept 2022]; Johnson v State of New York, 151 AD3d 1672, 1673-1674 [4th Dept 2017]). We have considered the parties' remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.

Entered: March 27, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court