Velez v. Diaz

227 A.D.2d 615, 643 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6080
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 28, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 227 A.D.2d 615 (Velez v. Diaz) 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
Velez v. Diaz, 227 A.D.2d 615, 643 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered March 27, 1995, which granted the motion of the defendants Manuel A. Diaz and Respiratory Control Systems, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A driver is not required to anticipate that an automobile [616]*616traveling in the opposite direction will cross over into oncoming traffic (see, Koch v Levenson, 225 AD2d 592; Williams v Econ, 221 AD2d 429; Griefer v Schneider, 215 AD2d 354). Accordingly, a driver confronted with such a sudden emergency situation is under no obligation to use his best judgment, and any error in his judgment is generally insufficient to constitute negligence (see, Williams v Econ, supra; Wright v Morozinis, 220 AD2d 496; Moller v Lieber, 156 AD2d 434). In the case at bar, it is undisputed that the vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger suddenly skidded into the opposite lane of traffic on a rainy morning, and that the defendant Manuel A. Diaz had only about "a second” to react to the oncoming vehicle. Under these circumstances, any possible negligence on the part of the defendant Manuel A. Diaz did not proximately cause the accident (see, Koch v Levenson, supra; Williams v Econ, supra; Moller v Lieber, supra). Miller, J. P., Ritter, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Snemyr v. Morales-Aparicio
47 A.D.3d 702 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Clough v. Szymanski
26 A.D.3d 894 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Dubi v. Jericho Fire District
22 A.D.3d 631 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Wasson v. Szafarski
6 A.D.3d 1182 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Guevara v. Zaharakis
303 A.D.2d 555 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Dormena v. Wallace
282 A.D.2d 425 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Islar v. Farrar
272 A.D.2d 580 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Phelps v. Legler
262 A.D.2d 621 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Camas v. Castellanos
260 A.D.2d 593 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Pressner v. Serrano
260 A.D.2d 458 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
McNally v. Fitzgerald
260 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Rodriguez v. Schwartz
257 A.D.2d 655 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Bentley v. Moore
251 A.D.2d 612 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
227 A.D.2d 615, 643 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/velez-v-diaz-nyappdiv-1996.