Meng Wai Wang v. Dailly News, L.P.

90 A.D.3d 624, 933 N.Y.2d 888
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 6, 2011
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 90 A.D.3d 624 (Meng Wai Wang v. Dailly News, L.P.) 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
Meng Wai Wang v. Dailly News, L.P., 90 A.D.3d 624, 933 N.Y.2d 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

On October 13, 2008, at approximately 3:00 a.m., the plaintiff was operating his motor vehicle in the right lane of the Brooklyn-bound side of the Manhattan Bridge. The plaintiff alleged that a truck owned by the defendant Dailly News, L.P, and operated by the defendant Giuseppi Amato, which was traveling in the left lane of the Brooklyn-bound side of the Manhattan Bridge directly adjacent to the plaintiffs vehicle, crossed the line dividing the two lanes of traffic into the right lane, striking the plaintiffs vehicle. After issue was joined and discovery was completed, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The Supreme Court denied the motion. We affirm.

The plaintiff established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability by submitting admissible evidence that Amato made an unsafe lane change in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1128 (a). The burden then shifted to the defendants to raise a triable issue of fact (see Harrison v Bailey, 79 AD3d 811 [2010]).

In opposition to the plaintiffs motion, the defendants submit[625]*625ted, inter alia, Amato’s affidavit and his deposition testimony, which were sufficient to raise triable issues of fact as to whether the plaintiff was the party who made an unsafe lane change in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1128 (a) (see Harrison v Bailey, 79 AD3d 811 [2010]).

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Mastro, A.PJ, Florio, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Marks v. Rieckhoff
2019 NY Slip Op 3584 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Leonard v. Pomarico
137 A.D.3d 1085 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Farruggio v. Lavender
123 A.D.3d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Singh v. Thomas
113 A.D.3d 748 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 A.D.3d 624, 933 N.Y.2d 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meng-wai-wang-v-dailly-news-lp-nyappdiv-2011.