Malbory v. David Chevrolet Buick Pontiac, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Malbory v. David Chevrolet Buick Pontiac, Inc.

108 A.D.3d 1109, 969 N.Y.S.2d 341

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

DecidedJuly 5, 2013

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 108 A.D.3d 1109 (Malbory v. David Chevrolet Buick Pontiac, Inc.) 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

Malbory v. David Chevrolet Buick Pontiac, Inc., 108 A.D.3d 1109, 969 N.Y.S.2d 341 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

[1110]*1110Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Diane Y. Devlin, J.), entered February 29, 2012. The order granted the motion of defendant Mattie Malbory for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she sustained while she was a passenger in a vehicle driven by her mother, Mattie Malbory (defendant). That vehicle was involved in a collision with a vehicle driven by defendant Christen Smith and owned by defendant David Chevrolet Buick Pontiac, Inc. (collectively, Smith defendants), who now appeal from an order granting defendant’s motion for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her. We affirm. It is well settled that a driver who has the right-of-way is entitled to anticipate that drivers of other vehicles will obey the traffic laws requiring them to yield (see Liskiewicz v Hameister, 104 AD3d 1194, 1194-1195 [2013]). Here, it is undisputed that the vehicle driven by defendant was traveling at a lawful rate of speed and had the right-of-way, and the Smith defendants failed to raise an issue of fact whether defendant had an opportunity to avoid the accident (see id. at 1195). Present — Scudder, P.J., Peradotto, Bindley and Sconiers, JJ.

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

[1110]*1110Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Diane Y. Devlin, J.), entered February 29, 2012. The order granted the motion of defendant Mattie Malbory for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she sustained while she was a passenger in a vehicle driven by her mother, Mattie Malbory (defendant). That vehicle was involved in a collision with a vehicle driven by defendant Christen Smith and owned by defendant David Chevrolet Buick Pontiac, Inc. (collectively, Smith defendants), who now appeal from an order granting defendant’s motion for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her. We affirm. It is well settled that a driver who has the right-of-way is entitled to anticipate that drivers of other vehicles will obey the traffic laws requiring them to yield (see Liskiewicz v Hameister, 104 AD3d 1194, 1194-1195 [2013]). Here, it is undisputed that the vehicle driven by defendant was traveling at a lawful rate of speed and had the right-of-way, and the Smith defendants failed to raise an issue of fact whether defendant had an opportunity to avoid the accident (see id. at 1195). Present — Scudder, P.J., Peradotto, Bindley and Sconiers, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 A.D.3d 1109, 969 N.Y.S.2d 341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malbory-v-david-chevrolet-buick-pontiac-inc-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack