RHEE v. Ricky Lovell, Defendant-Appellant. (2005)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Enbok RHEE, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. David WONG, Defendant-Respondent, Ricky Lovell, Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: February 24, 2005

MAZZARELLI, J.P., SULLIVAN, ELLERIN, NARDELLI, WILLIAMS, JJ.

Law Office of Mary A. Bjork, Yonkers (David Holmes of counsel), for appellant. Law Office of Seener & Seener, Melville (Steven Seener of counsel), for Rhee respondents. Cheven, Keely & Hatzis, New York (William B. Stock of counsel), for David Wong, respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered January 15, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant Lovell's cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs seek recovery for personal injuries sustained in a three-car accident. It is alleged that Lovell's automobile was struck by a hit-and-run driver and that plaintiffs' vehicle came to a stop behind Lovell's, and was then struck from the rear by defendant Wong's vehicle, driving it into Lovell's. The court denied summary relief sought by each of the parties, and only Lovell appeals. Triable issues of fact exist, including the reasonableness of Lovell's failure to pull to the side of the road after being struck by the nonparty hit-and-run driver (Bertrand v. Vingan, 249 A.D.2d 13, 671 N.Y.S.2d 226 [1998] ).

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network