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.
Ronnie ADAMS, et al., appellants, v. LEMBERG ENTERPRISES, INC., et al., defendants, Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc., et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated June 21, 2006, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc., and Mohamed Raphique which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion of the defendants Pacific Petroleum Transport Inc., and Mohamed Raphique which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them is denied.
The injured plaintiff allegedly was standing behind a double-parked truck, which was owned by the defendant Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc., and operated by the defendant Mohamed Raphique, when a vehicle operated by the defendant Cornelius Daisy pinned him against the double-parked truck.
It is well settled that evidence of negligence is not enough by itself to establish liability. It must also be proved that the negligence was a proximate cause of the injury-producing event (see Sheehan v. City of New York, 40 N.Y.2d 496, 501, 387 N.Y.S.2d 92, 354 N.E.2d 832; Peters v. City of New York, 33 A.D.3d 779, 823 N.Y.S.2d 113). Generally, issues of proximate cause are for the fact finder to resolve (see Derdiarian v. Felix Contr. Corp., 51 N.Y.2d 308, 434 N.Y.S.2d 166, 414 N.E.2d 666). Here, the defendants Pacific Petroleum Transport Inc., and Mohamed Raphique failed to submit evidence sufficient to demonstrate their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642). The issue of whether Raphique's negligence in double parking his truck was a proximate cause of the accident should be submitted to the jury (see Ferrer v. Harris, 55 N.Y.2d 285, 449 N.Y.S.2d 162, 434 N.E.2d 231; Giordano v. Sheridan Maintenance Corp., 38 A.D.2d 552, 328 N.Y.S.2d 241).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 09, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)