Welch v. Norman

282 A.D.2d 448, 722 N.Y.S.2d 264, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3271
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 2, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 282 A.D.2d 448 (Welch v. Norman) 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
Welch v. Norman, 282 A.D.2d 448, 722 N.Y.S.2d 264, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3271 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages, for personal injuries, the defendants Stephen M. Faughnan and Union County Florist Supply appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rudolph, J.), entered April 25, 2000, as denied their motion [449]*449for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them and granted that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was for summary judgment against them on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant Robert L. Norman was driving on Gramatan Avenue in Mount Vernon when his vehicle collided with a van making a left turn at the intersection with Lincoln Avenue. The van was operated by the appellant Stephen M. Faughnan and owned by the appellant Union County Florist Supply. As a result of the collision, Norman’s car was propelled into the air and landed on a sidewalk, injuring the plaintiff, a pedestrian.

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellants’ motion for summary judgment, as they failed to meet their burden of establishing prima facie that they were not negligent. Further, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment against the appellants on the issue of liability. The evidence in the record established that Faughnan was negligent as a matter of law in making a left turn in front of Norman’s oncoming vehicle (see, Smalley v McCarthy, 254 AD2d 478; Mattera v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 245 AD2d 274; Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1141). The evidence relied on by the appellants was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to their lack of liability. O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Goldstein and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cadeau v. Gregorio
104 A.D.3d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Eaker v. Long Island American Water Co.
79 A.D.3d 967 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Bellantone v. Toddy Taxi, Inc.
307 A.D.2d 979 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Sureda v. Diamonti
300 A.D.2d 572 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Russo v. Scibetti
298 A.D.2d 514 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Shmarkatyuk v. Chouchereba
291 A.D.2d 487 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
282 A.D.2d 448, 722 N.Y.S.2d 264, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welch-v-norman-nyappdiv-2001.