CERIO v. CARRINGTON (2018)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered November 23, 2015, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the motion of defendant City of New York for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was injured when defendant Carrington, an intoxicated driver, attempted to make an illegal u-turn and collided with a taxicab.  Carrington's vehicle then careened onto the sidewalk and struck plaintiff.

The City established its prima facie burden of demonstrating that the intersection where the accident occurred was reasonably safe, and that it did not have any prior complaints about motorists making illegal u-turns.  The City was not required to continually reevaluate the signs at the intersection absent proof that it had become unsafe (see Chunhye Kang–Kim v. City of New York, 29 A.D.3d 57, 59, 810 N.Y.S.2d 147 [1st Dept. 2006] ).

In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact.  Given the absence of any history of similar accidents at the subject location, plaintiff's expert's conclusory opinion that a “no u-turn” sign should have been installed lacked probative value (see Diakite v. City of New York, 42 A.D.3d 338, 339, 840 N.Y.S.2d 33 [1st Dept. 2007] lv denied 9 N.Y.3d 811, 846 N.Y.S.2d 601, 877 N.E.2d 651 [2007] ).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.