Paljevic v. Smith

20 A.D.3d 517, 799 N.Y.S.2d 139
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 18, 2005
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 20 A.D.3d 517 (Paljevic v. Smith) 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
Paljevic v. Smith, 20 A.D.3d 517, 799 N.Y.S.2d 139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

[518]*518In an action to recover damages for personal injuries etc., the defendants Sharon M. Smith and Timothy Askew appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.) dated August 20, 2004, which denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs were passengers in a vehicle owned and operated by the defendant Joseph C. Murphy when it was involved in an accident with a vehicle owned by the defendant Sharon M. Smith and operated by the defendant Timothy Askew, at the intersection of Bowne Street and Minnieford Avenue on City Island in the Bronx. Smith and Askew moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground that the accident was caused solely by the negligence of Murphy. The undisputed proof that the vehicle operated by Murphy proceeded into the intersection, which was controlled by a stop sign, and failed to yield the right-of-way to the vehicle operated by Askew in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1142 (a), established, prima facie, Smith and Askew’s entitlement to summary judgment (see Ishak v Guzman, 12 AD3d 409 [2004]).

Nevertheless, the motion was properly denied, as, in opposition, the plaintiffs raise a triable issue of fact as to whether Askew was also negligent, and if so, whether that negligence contributed to the happening of the accident (see Bodner v Greenwald, 296 AD2d 564 [2002]; King v Washburn, 273 AD2d 725 [2000]). Prudenti, P.J., Schmidt, Santucci, Luciano and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Yelder v. Walters
64 A.D.3d 762 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Lara v. Simmons
29 A.D.3d 642 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 A.D.3d 517, 799 N.Y.S.2d 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paljevic-v-smith-nyappdiv-2005.