Summary
The Appellate Division, First Department reversed the Supreme Court's denial of a motion to consolidate a personal injury action with a related subrogation action pending in Civil Court. The court found that both cases arose from the same motor vehicle collision and presented common questions of law and fact, warranting joint discovery and trial under CPLR 602. No opposition was filed to demonstrate how consolidation would prejudice a substantial right or delay either action.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Supreme Court erred in denying the motion to consolidate the subrogation action with the personal injury action under CPLR 602.
Holdings
- The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's denial and ordered consolidation of the two actions because they present common questions of law or fact and no prejudice was shown.
Key quotations
“Thus, the issues of whether defendant is responsible to pay Geico, as plaintiff's subrogee, for the property damage to plaintiff's vehicle or may be held liable to plaintiff in the instant action for the injuries plaintiff allegedly sustained as a result of the same motor vehicle collision present common questions of law or fact, warranting joinder (see CPLR 602 [a], [b]; Lema v 1148 Corp., 176 AD3d 653, 654 [1st Dept 2019]; see also Raboy v McCrory Corp., 210 AD2d 145, 147 [1st Dept 1994]). No opposition was submitted to demonstrate how consolidation would prejudice a substantial right or delay either action (see Matter of Progressive Ins. Co. [Vasquez-Countrywide Ins. Co.], 10 AD3d 518, 519 [1st Dept 2004]).” (at start)
Factual background
The plaintiff, Abraham Montgomery, sued Ramon Manzueta for personal injuries arising from a motor vehicle collision. In a separate subrogation action, Geico Indemnity Company sued Manzueta for property damage to Montgomery's vehicle stemming from the same collision. Both actions involved the same negligence allegations and no party opposed consolidation.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Bronx County denied the defendant's motion to consolidate a subrogation action in Queens County with the personal injury action. The Appellate Division reversed that order and ordered consolidation.
Remand instructions
Consolidate the subrogation action with the personal injury action for joint trial and discovery.