SACCO v. PHILLIPPSEN (2000)

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries she sustained when the automobile in which she was a passenger slid off the road and struck a utility pole.   Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on liability against defendants Elizabeth J. Phillippsen (defendant), the driver of the automobile, and Patricia J. Phillippsen, its owner.   Plaintiff failed to establish her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law with respect to the applicability of the emergency doctrine.   A reasonable view of the evidence supports the conclusion that defendant “was confronted by a sudden and unforeseen occurrence not of [her] own making” when the car ahead of her began swerving and she encountered a patch of snow on an otherwise clear road (Rivera v. New York City Tr. Auth., 77 N.Y.2d 322, 327, 567 N.Y.S.2d 629, 569 N.E.2d 432, rearg. denied 77 N.Y.2d 990, 571 N.Y.S.2d 916, 575 N.E.2d 402).   Whether the circumstances constituted an emergency and whether defendant's conduct was reasonable in light of those circumstances are issues for the trier of fact (see, Kuci v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 88 N.Y.2d 923, 924, 646 N.Y.S.2d 788, 669 N.E.2d 1110;  Barber v. Young, 238 A.D.2d 822, 823-824, 656 N.Y.S.2d 529, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 808, 664 N.Y.S.2d 269, 686 N.E.2d 1364;  Davey v. Ohler, 188 A.D.2d 726, 727, 590 N.Y.S.2d 584).

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied.

MEMORANDUM: