JIMINEZ v. ROSI (2025)

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Fernando Tapia, J.), entered June 5, 2025, which denied plaintiff's motion for leave to renew its opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment or to vacate an order, same court and Justice, entered May 13, 2025, granting defendants' unopposed motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, plaintiff's motion to vacate granted, and the matter remanded for consideration of the motion for summary judgment on the merits.

The parties do not contest, and Supreme Court providently found, that plaintiff demonstrated a reasonable excuse for her default in opposing defendants' motion for summary judgment based on law office failure (see Sara's Studios, LLC v. Sparkle World LLC, 217 A.D.3d 465, 466, 188 N.Y.S.3d 501 [1st Dept. 2023]).

However, the court improperly denied plaintiff's motion to vacate as plaintiff proffered a potentially meritorious claim through submission of her deposition testimony and defendant-driver Rosi's deposition testimony (see Luciano–Mahoney v. Rossman, 191 A.D.3d 604, 605, 139 N.Y.S.3d 536 [1st Dept. 2021]).  Plaintiff testified that prior to the collision with the vehicle owned and operated by defendants, she stopped at the stop sign at the intersection.  Rosi testified that there were no traffic control signals in the direction he was traveling, that he did not know if plaintiff had stopped at the stop sign regulating her direction of travel, and that he could not recall if he saw plaintiff's vehicle prior to the collision (see id.).