Raposo v. Raposo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Raposo v. Raposo

250 A.D.2d 420, 673 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5424

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

DecidedMay 12, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 250 A.D.2d 420 (Raposo v. Raposo) 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

Raposo v. Raposo, 250 A.D.2d 420, 673 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5424 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered March 5, 1997, which denied defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants-appellants sought summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to them upon the ground that defendant Sanchez, the driver of defendant Di-Rich’s vehicle, had been confronted with an emergency situation when the car in which plaintiffs were riding suddenly crossed from the westbound lane of traffic into the eastbound lane in the immediate path of the Di-Rich vehicle. As the motion court found, however, the deposition testimony of plaintiffs and defendant-respondent Ramon Raposo to the effect that there had been an interval of several seconds between the cross-over and the collision raises a triable issue as to whether Sanchez was in fact confronted by an emergency situation and, concomitantly, as to whether Sanchez had a reasonable opportunity under the circumstances to avoid the collision (compare, Caban v Vega, 226 AD2d 109, 111). Given the existence of these factual issues, it cannot be said as a matter of law that defendants-appellants were not in some measure responsible for the subject accident and therefore, summary judgment was properly denied. Concur— Milonas, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard Silver, J.), entered March 5, 1997, which denied defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants-appellants sought summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to them upon the ground that defendant Sanchez, the driver of defendant Di-Rich’s vehicle, had been confronted with an emergency situation when the car in which plaintiffs were riding suddenly crossed from the westbound lane of traffic into the eastbound lane in the immediate path of the Di-Rich vehicle. As the motion court found, however, the deposition testimony of plaintiffs and defendant-respondent Ramon Raposo to the effect that there had been an interval of several seconds between the cross-over and the collision raises a triable issue as to whether Sanchez was in fact confronted by an emergency situation and, concomitantly, as to whether Sanchez had a reasonable opportunity under the circumstances to avoid the collision (compare, Caban v Vega, 226 AD2d 109, 111). Given the existence of these factual issues, it cannot be said as a matter of law that defendants-appellants were not in some measure responsible for the subject accident and therefore, summary judgment was properly denied. Concur— Milonas, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 420, 673 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raposo-v-raposo-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack