MESSANA v. RALLO (2008)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Angelina MESSANA, et al., appellants, v. Salvatore A. RALLO, respondent.

Decided: February 13, 2008

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., PETER B. SKELOS, ANITA R. FLORIO, and THOMAS A. DICKERSON, JJ.

Composto & Composto, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Frank A. Composto and Eric C. Bryant of counsel), for appellants. Martyn, Toher & Martyn, Mineola, N.Y. (Christine J. Hill of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Nelson, J.), entered March 19, 2007, which granted the defendant's 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 denied.

In response to the defendant's showing of his entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the plaintiffs raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant was negligent and, if so, whether his actions were a proximate cause of the accident (see Exime v. Williams, 45 A.D.3d 633, 845 N.Y.S.2d 450; Croce v. Budget Rent-A-Car Corp., 7 A.D.3d 748, 776 N.Y.S.2d 899; Siegel v. Sweeney, 266 A.D.2d 200, 202, 697 N.Y.S.2d 317). Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment should have been denied (see generally Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572).

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network