Hopkins v. Terwilliger

2025 NY Slip Op 04002 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · July 2, 2025 · No. 2021-08473

Summary

This Appellate Division decision reviews an order granting summary judgment dismissing a personal injury complaint based on collateral estoppel from a prior DMV administrative hearing. The court held that the plaintiff did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate liability at the administrative hearing due to procedural limitations, such as being barred from cross-examining witnesses. Additionally, the court found a triable issue of fact regarding the defendant's fault, reversing the lower court's dismissal and denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
Mark C. Dillon; Francesca E. Connolly; Linda Christopher; Barry E. Warhit
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
July 2, 2025
Docket number
2021-08473
Procedural posture
Appellant appealed an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint (Oct. 13, 2021) and an order denying leave to reargue the opposition to that motion (Nov. 10, 2022).
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Athena Hopkins, Kenneth Hopkins v. James J. Terwilliger
Disposition
reversed

Topics

summary judgmentappellate procedurecivil procedurenegligenceadministrative law

Practice areas

civil proceduretortsadministrative law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the doctrine of collateral estoppel bars the plaintiff’s negligence action based on the DMV administrative hearing determination
  2. Whether summary judgment was proper where genuine issues of fact exist regarding liability and proximate cause

Holdings

  1. The appellate court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, holding that collateral estoppel does not apply because the plaintiff was not afforded a full and fair opportunity to litigate the liability issue before the administrative tribunal.
  2. The court denied summary judgment, holding that the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to the defendant’s fault and proximate cause, and therefore the defendant had not met the burden of establishing a prima facie case.

Key quotations

There can be more than one proximate cause of an accident, and generally, it is for the trier of fact to determine the issue of proximate cause.
Thus, a defendant moving for summary judgment in a negligence action has the burden of establishing, prima facie, that he or she was not at fault in the happening of the subject accident.

Factual background

In November 2017 Kenneth Hopkins sued James Terwilliger for injuries sustained when Hopkins’ motorcycle collided with Terwilliger’s white van. The DMV administrative hearing concluded that Hopkins violated traffic laws and that the van never made contact with the motorcycle, attributing sole cause to Hopkins. The defendant moved for summary judgment asserting collateral estoppel based on the ALJ’s determination. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding the action barred by collateral estoppel.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, Orange County granted summary judgment on the basis of collateral estoppel and later denied the plaintiff’s request to reargue. The appellant appealed both orders to the Appellate Division, Second Department.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…