Tavares-Vera v. County of Suffolk
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
Tavares-Vera v County of Suffolk
2026 NY Slip Op 04528
July 22, 2026
Appellate Division, Second 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.
Pedro Tavares-Vera, appellant,
v
County of Suffolk, defendant, Town of Babylon, et al., respondents.
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Decided on July 22, 2026
2025-03122, (Index No. 605772/22)
Mark C. Dillon, J.P.
Deborah A. Dowling
Carl J. Landicino
James P. McCormack, JJ.
Harmon, Linder & Rogowsky (Mitchell Dranow, Sea Cliff, NY, of counsel), for appellant.
Joseph Wilson, Town Attorney, Lindenhurst, NY (Elisabeth A. Sclafani of counsel), for respondents.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kathy G. Bergmann, J.), dated March 5, 2025. The order granted the motion of the defendants Town of Babylon and Ferdi Ozdemir for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries he allegedly sustained when a snowplow, owned by the defendant Town of Babylon and operated by its employee, the defendant Ferdi Ozdemir (hereinafter together the defendants), came into contact with a vehicle the plaintiff was driving. The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. In an order dated March 5, 2025, the Supreme Court granted their motion. The plaintiff appeals.
"A snowplow operator 'actually engaged in work on a highway' is exempt from the rules of the road and may be held liable only for damages caused by an act done in 'reckless disregard for the safety of others'" (Ventura v County of Nassau, 175 AD3d 620, 621, quoting Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103[b]; see Joya v Baratta, 164 AD3d 772, 772-773; Rockland Coaches, Inc. v Town of Clarkstown, 49 AD3d 705, 706). Reckless disregard requires more than a momentary lapse in judgment (see Saarinen v Kerr, 84 NY2d 494, 502; Rockland Coaches, Inc. v Town of Clarkstown, 49 AD3d at 706). "This requires a showing that the operator acted in conscious disregard of a known or obvious risk that was so great as to make it highly probable that harm would follow" (Joya v Baratta, 164 AD3d at 773 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Bliss v State of New York, 95 NY2d 911, 913; Rockland Coaches, Inc. v Town of Clarkstown, 49 AD3d at 706).
Here, the defendants demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. It is undisputed that the defendants were actually engaged in snowplow-related work on a highway at the time of the collision and, thus, were entitled to the protection of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103(b). The defendants' submissions, including deposition testimony, established, prima facie, that the defendants did not [*2]act with reckless disregard for the safety of others (see Veralli v O'Connor, 190 AD3d 783, 784-785; Kaffash v Village of Great Neck Estates, 190 AD3d 709, 710). Ozdemir made use of the snowplow's side mirrors for backward views upon backing up, and it is uncontested that the snowplow's hazard lights were on. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise any triable question of fact relevant to the issue of reckless disregard.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
DILLON, J.P., DOWLING, LANDICINO and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
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
Tavares-Vera v. County of Suffolk (Tavares-Vera v. County of Suffolk) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.