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.
Epifanio ALMONTE, appellant, v. Maria TOBIAS, et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (F. Rivera, J.), dated July 15, 2005, which granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1141 when he made a left turn directly into the path of the vehicle driven by the defendant Rudolph Hill. The plaintiff was negligent in failing to see that which, under the circumstances, he should have seen, and in crossing in front of the defendants' vehicle when it was hazardous to do so (see Salce v. Check, 23 A.D.3d 451, 805 N.Y.S.2d 608; Moreback v. Mesquita, 17 A.D.3d 420, 793 N.Y.S.2d 148; Torro v. Schiller, 8 A.D.3d 364, 777 N.Y.S.2d 915; Russo v. Scibetti, 298 A.D.2d 514, 748 N.Y.S.2d 871; Stiles v. County of Dutchess, 278 A.D.2d 304, 717 N.Y.S.2d 325). Furthermore, since Hill had the right of way, he was entitled to anticipate that the plaintiff would obey traffic laws which required him to yield (see Stiles v. County of Dutchess, supra ). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to submit evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
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: January 16, 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)