Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Tracey S. VAN DOREN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pauline A. DRESSLER and The Salvation Army, Defendants-Respondents.
Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she sustained when a vehicle operated by Pauline A. Dressler (defendant) and owned by defendant The Salvation Army collided with a vehicle in which plaintiff was a passenger. Supreme Court erred in denying plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. The record establishes that the accident occurred when defendant was exiting a parking lot onto a roadway, in an attempt to cross several lanes of traffic. Defendant failed to see the approaching vehicle in which plaintiff was a passenger, however, and she collided with the passenger side of the vehicle, where plaintiff was seated. We conclude that plaintiff met her initial burden on the motion with respect to defendant by establishing that defendant failed to yield to traffic on the roadway, in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1143, and that the violation was a proximate cause of the accident. Plaintiff also thus met her initial burden with respect to defendant The Salvation Army by establishing that it was vicariously liable as the owner of the vehicle (see § 388). Defendants failed to submit the requisite evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to raise an issue of fact to defeat the motion (see generally Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718), inasmuch as they failed to submit any evidence that defendant was not negligent or that any negligence on defendant's part was not a proximate cause of the accident.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the motion is granted.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: November 09, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)