TREVINO v. Sandeep Reddy Velkurv, et al., Defendants–Appellants. (1998)

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

Rhonda TREVINO, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. Emerson M. CASTRO, et al., Defendants, Sandeep Reddy Velkurv, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

Decided: December 01, 1998

MILONAS, J.P., ELLERIN, RUBIN and MAZZARELLI, JJ.

Leonard B. Austin, for Plaintiffs–Respondents. John Kevin Reilly, for Defendants–Appellants.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Madden, J.), entered February 13, 1998, which denied defendants-appellants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants owner and driver of the car in which plaintiff was a passenger argue that the depositions show that the driver was confronted with an emergency situation when the car with which his car collided, which was traveling in the opposite direction, suddenly crossed over into his lane of traffic and into his immediate path, and that they are therefore entitled to summary judgment. The deposition testimony of both plaintiff and the driver, to the effect that there had been an interval of several seconds between the cross-over and the collision, raises a triable issue as to whether the driver was confronted with an emergency, and, if not, whether he took reasonable steps to avoid the collision (see, Raposo v. Raposo, 250 A.D.2d 420, 673 N.Y.S.2d 92).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

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Out of date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