Wojeski v. Delfavero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wojeski v. Delfavero

303 A.D.2d 1004, 759 N.Y.S.2d 618, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3005

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 1004 (Wojeski v. Delfavero) 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

Wojeski v. Delfavero, 303 A.D.2d 1004, 759 N.Y.S.2d 618, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3005 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Corning, J.), entered January 17, 2002, which denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of plaintiff, Supreme Court properly denied her motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries that she sustained in a motor vehicle collision when a vehicle driven by defendant turned left in front of her vehicle at an intersection. We conclude that there is an issue of fact whether excessive speed on the part of plaintiff contributed to the accident. Plaintiff testified at her deposition that she did not see defendant’s vehicle in sufficient time to avoid the collision, and the affidavit of an eyewitness submitted by defendant in opposition to the motion permits the conclusion that the inability of plaintiff to avoid the collision may have resulted from the high rate of speed of her vehicle (see Weng v Gill, 52 AD2d 923 [1976], affd 42 NY2d 927 [1977]; Shpritzman v Strong, 248 AD2d 524 [1005]*1005[1998]; Patti v Fenimore, 181 AD2d 869, 871 [1992]; cf. Barile v Carroll, 280 AD2d 988 [2001]). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Wisner, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Corning, J.), entered January 17, 2002, which denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of plaintiff, Supreme Court properly denied her motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries that she sustained in a motor vehicle collision when a vehicle driven by defendant turned left in front of her vehicle at an intersection. We conclude that there is an issue of fact whether excessive speed on the part of plaintiff contributed to the accident. Plaintiff testified at her deposition that she did not see defendant’s vehicle in sufficient time to avoid the collision, and the affidavit of an eyewitness submitted by defendant in opposition to the motion permits the conclusion that the inability of plaintiff to avoid the collision may have resulted from the high rate of speed of her vehicle (see Weng v Gill, 52 AD2d 923 [1976], affd 42 NY2d 927 [1977]; Shpritzman v Strong, 248 AD2d 524 [1005]*1005[1998]; Patti v Fenimore, 181 AD2d 869, 871 [1992]; cf. Barile v Carroll, 280 AD2d 988 [2001]). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Wisner, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 1004, 759 N.Y.S.2d 618, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wojeski-v-delfavero-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack