HOU CHING CHOU v. WONG (2006)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Grays, J.), dated May 5, 2006, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

The defendant, Jason Wong, established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that, after the plaintiff, Hou-Ching Chou, brought his vehicle to a stop at the stop sign controlling the plaintiff's direction of traffic, the plaintiff proceeded into the intersection directly into the path of the defendant's oncoming vehicle, which he saw approaching (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1142[a];  Friedberg v. Citiwide Auto Leasing, 22 A.D.3d 522, 801 N.Y.S.2d 770;  Ishak v. Guzman, 12 A.D.3d 409, 784 N.Y.S.2d 600;  Morgan v. Hachmann, 9 A.D.3d 400, 780 N.Y.S.2d 33).   In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.   The plaintiff's contention that the defendant was speeding is speculative and unsupported by any competent evidence (see McNamara v. Fishkowitz, 18 A.D.3d 721, 795 N.Y.S.2d 714;  Mora v. Garcia, 3 A.D.3d 478, 479, 771 N.Y.S.2d 138;  Meretskaya v. Logozzo, 2 A.D.3d 599, 769 N.Y.S.2d 580;  Breslin v. Rudden, 291 A.D.2d 471, 738 N.Y.S.2d 674).

Accordingly, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been granted.