Robinson v. DeSouza

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 2, 2026
DocketIndex No. 21579/20|Appeal No. 6756-6757|Case No. 2024-05108 2025-05193|
StatusPublished

This text of Robinson v. DeSouza (Robinson v. DeSouza) 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
Robinson v. DeSouza, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Robinson v DeSouza - 2026 NY Slip Op 03408
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Robinson v DeSouza

2026 NY Slip Op 03408

June 2, 2026

Appellate Division, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Lisa M. Robinson, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

John J. DeSouza et al., Defendants-Respondents, John J. Hermanowski et al., Defendants-Appellants.

Decided and Entered: June 02, 2026

Index No. 21579/20|Appeal No. 6756-6757|Case No. 2024-05108 2025-05193|

Before: Moulton, J.P., Kapnick, GonzáLez, Shulman, Chan, JJ.

Armienti, DeBellis, & Rhoden, LLP, Mineola (Vanessa M. Corchia of counsel), for appellants.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Joshua Block of counsel), for Lisa M. Robinson, respondent.

[*1]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John A. Howard-Algarin, J.), entered on or about July 5, 2024, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability against defendants John J. Hermanowski, Metropolitan Transportation Authority, MTA Metro-North Railroad, and the City of New York (collectively, the City), unanimously modified, on the law, to grant plaintiff's motion only to the extent of finding no culpable conduct by plaintiff on the issue of liability and to vacate the finding of liability against the City, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered on or about August 5, 2025, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied the City's motion for leave to renew, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

Plaintiff was a passenger in the rear seat of a taxi owned by defendant American United Transportation Inc. and operated by defendant John J. DeSouza (collectively, the DeSouza defendants). The taxi and a truck owned by the City and operated by Hermanowski collided. DeSouza and Hermanowski each claim that the other party caused the collision by improperly merging and striking the side of the other party's vehicle.

There is no dispute that plaintiff was an innocent passenger and cannot be found at fault under any version of how this collision occurred. Therefore, plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment to the extent of finding that she was not culpable in connection with the collision (see Hobbs v MTA Bus Co., 211 AD3d 471, 472 [1st Dept 2022]). However, to obtain summary judgment against the City defendants, plaintiff was still required to establish Hermanowski's liability under traditional principles of tort liability (id.). Plaintiff failed to make the requisite showing, as the evidence presented raises triable issues of fact as to how the collision occurred (see Bajaha v Mercy Care Transp., Inc., 172 AD3d 416, 419 [1st Dept 2019]). If Hermanowski's account is accepted as true, it is possible that the DeSouza defendants will be found to be solely at fault for this accident (see Hobbs, 211 AD3d at 472).

In light of the foregoing, the City's appeal of the court's denial of their motion to renew is academic (see Valley Natl. Bank v Community Prot. Church of Co-op City,Inc. , 245 AD3d 433, 434 [1st Dept 2026]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: June 2, 2026

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

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

Related

Hobbs v. MTA Bus Co.
211 A.D.3d 471 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Robinson v. DeSouza, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-desouza-nyappdiv-2026.