Lilia Angarita et al v. Michael D. Cuddy et al (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (142.00, 144.00)

In this motor vehicle accident case the plaintiff Lilia Angarita has sued the defendants Michael and Marion Cuddy for damages.   The Cuddy's filed an apportionment complaint against Daniel Cooke, owner of real property near the accident site.   Cooke has filed motions for summary judgment seeking to dismiss the apportionment complaint and an amended complaint filed by Angarita against him.

The court is aware of, and has applied, the applicable standards for resolving motions for summary judgment.   The court has reviewed all the papers and exhibits filed in support of, and opposing the motions, including the transcript of Michael Cuddy's deposition.

Cooke claims that the evidence shows that claims against him based on shrubbery on his property growing to a height and width as to impair a motorist's sight lines cannot support a finding that the condition of the shrubs could be a proximate cause of the accident between Angarita and Mr. Cuddy.   Cooke refers to various points in Mr. Cuddy's deposition which indicate generally that, at one point in time, his view of oncoming traffic was impaired by the shrubs, at a later point before the accident occurred, the shrubs did not impair his view.

The definition of proximate cause is well established in the law.   However, whether a condition was a proximate cause of an accident is generally left to a jury to decide.   The Cuddy deposition lends some support to Cooke's position, but does not eliminate completely the possibility that a reasonable jury might find otherwise, (i.e. view impaired by shrubbery was a proximate cause of the accident) based on issues of credibility or other evidence presented.

The motions for summary judgment are denied.

TAGGART D. ADAMS

SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE

Adams, Taggart D., J.