ROBINSON v. Jamil Mohammed et al., Defendants–Respondents. (2025)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Christopher Chin, J.), entered on or about March 27, 2025, which, to the extent appealed from, as limited by the briefs, denied the motion of defendants Bronx County Public Administrator, as Administrator of the Estate of Kem F. Delgado, and GVC Ltd. (together, the GVC defendants) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The evidence provided by the GVC defendants in support of their motion for summary judgment was insufficient to meet their prima facie burden.  While the police accident report and repair estimate contradict plaintiff's account that the bus struck the taxi in the rear, they do not necessarily overcome plaintiff's testimony that the taxi was stationary for about 30 seconds before being struck by the bus.  There can be more than one proximate cause of an accident (see Matias v. Bello, 165 A.D.3d 642, 643, 84 N.Y.S.3d 551 [2d Dept. 2018]), and the record does not establish that the actions of the operator of the taxi were the sole proximate cause of the accident as a matter of law.  Further, the affidavit of the bus attendant “contradicted h[er] deposition testimony” and thus “could not be relied upon to establish a prima facie case for summary judgment” (Tucker v. New York City Hous. Auth., 127 A.D.3d 619, 620, 8 N.Y.S.3d 141 [1st Dept. 2015]).

For the foregoing reasons, the motion court properly denied the GVC defendants’ motion (Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642 [1985]).