Summary
This New York Appellate Division decision reviews a trial court order granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on liability and dismissing the defendants' affirmative defenses in a personal injury action arising from a vehicle collision. The appellate court reversed, holding that conflicting deposition testimony and an opposing affidavit created triable issues of fact regarding comparative negligence and the emergency doctrine. Consequently, the branches seeking summary judgment were denied.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case of negligence sufficient for summary judgment on liability.
- Whether the defendants' affirmative defenses of comparative negligence and the emergency doctrine should be dismissed on summary judgment.
Holdings
- Summary judgment on liability was denied because the defendants presented triable issues of fact.
- The dismissal of the affirmative defenses was denied; the defenses remain viable for trial.
Key quotations
“A plaintiff in a negligence action moving for summary judgment on the issue of liability must establish, prima facie, that the defendant breached a duty owed to the plaintiff and that the defendant's negligence was a proximate cause of the alleged injuries.” (at 1)
Factual background
The plaintiff, Gonpo Tsering, was operating a vehicle that was parked when it was rear‑ended by a vehicle owned by Fifth Avenue Foods, LLC and driven by Eric D. Dean. Dean testified that the plaintiff's vehicle cut in front of his and double‑parked, causing Dean to maneuver around the plaintiff's vehicle and clip its mirror.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Queens County entered an order on June 14, 2022 granting the plaintiff's summary‑judgment motion on liability and dismissing the defendants' affirmative defenses. The defendants appealed that order to the Appellate Division, Second Department.