FERMAGLICH v. Great Springs Waters, third-party defendant-respondent. (2007)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the third-party plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), dated September 6, 2005, which granted the third-party defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the third-party defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.   Even assuming that the delivery truck owned by the third-party defendant was parked in violation of parking regulations, the third-party defendant demonstrated its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by presenting evidence that the location of its vehicle was not a proximate cause of the accident (see Gerrity v. Muthana, 7 N.Y.3d 834, 824 N.Y.S.2d 206, 857 N.E.2d 527;  Sheehan v. City of New York, 40 N.Y.2d 496, 503, 387 N.Y.S.2d 92, 354 N.E.2d 832;  Condra v. Reckson Operating Partnership, 6 A.D.3d 483, 774 N.Y.S.2d 414;  Mendrykowski v. New York Tel. Co., 2 A.D.3d 1410, 768 N.Y.S.2d 874;  Whitehead v. Reithoffer Shows, 304 A.D.2d 754, 759 N.Y.S.2d 125;  Dormena v. Wallace, 282 A.D.2d 425, 723 N.Y.S.2d 72).   In opposition to the motion, the third-party plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the location of the parked delivery truck was a proximate cause of the accident.