Nabbore v. Schneider

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nabbore v. Schneider

62 A.D.3d 766, 877 N.Y.S.2d 902

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

DecidedMay 12, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 62 A.D.3d 766 (Nabbore v. Schneider) 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

Nabbore v. Schneider, 62 A.D.3d 766, 877 N.Y.S.2d 902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Spinner, J.), dated January 29, 2008, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the defendant driver’s deposition testimony that the accident occurred when the defendant driver exited a driveway and made a left turn across the plaintiffs lane of travel in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1143 (cf. Ferrara v Castro, 283 AD2d 392, 392-393 [2001]; Yasinosky v Lenio, 28 AD3d 652, 653 [2006]). In opposition, however, the defendants raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant driver’s negligence, if any, was a substantial factor in causing the accident (cf. Gerdvil v Tarnowski, 43 AD3d 995, 995-996 [2007]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Spolzino, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Spinner, J.), dated January 29, 2008, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the defendant driver’s deposition testimony that the accident occurred when the defendant driver exited a driveway and made a left turn across the plaintiffs lane of travel in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1143 (cf. Ferrara v Castro, 283 AD2d 392, 392-393 [2001]; Yasinosky v Lenio, 28 AD3d 652, 653 [2006]). In opposition, however, the defendants raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant driver’s negligence, if any, was a substantial factor in causing the accident (cf. Gerdvil v Tarnowski, 43 AD3d 995, 995-996 [2007]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Spolzino, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 766, 877 N.Y.S.2d 902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nabbore-v-schneider-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack