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.
Mohammad Qamar, respondent, v Rachel B. Kanarek, et al., appellants.
Argued-February 15, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated July 26, 2010, as granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In support of his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, the plaintiff pedestrian demonstrated that the defendant driver failed to yield the right-of-way in making a left turn and struck the plaintiff while the plaintiff was crossing the street within the crosswalk with a pedestrian traffic signal in his favor. The plaintiff showed that he exercised due care in crossing the street and that he was struck by the defendant driver, suddenly and without warning, when he was more than halfway across the street, having “almost reached” the curb that he was crossing to. Thus, contrary to the defendants' contention, the plaintiff demonstrated his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Klee v Americas Best Bottling Co., Inc., 60 AD3d 911; Benedikt v. Certified Lbr. Corp., 60 AD3d 798; Voskin v. Lemel, 52 AD3d 503; cf. Thoma v. Ronai, 82 N.Y.2d 736). In opposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN and MILLER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Docket No: 2010-08673 (Index No. 15312 /09)
Decided: March 08, 2011
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)