LYNCH v. PARTELOW (2026)

DECISION & ORDER

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Michael G. Hayes, J.), dated April 4, 2025.  The order granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant was operating a vehicle in a northerly direction on Route 82 when she attempted to turn left onto North Shanks Road. As she was making the turn, the defendant's vehicle was struck by a vehicle operated by Madison Lynch Dingee (hereinafter the decedent), which was traveling in a northerly direction in the southbound lane of Route 82.  The decedent, a high school junior, was operating her vehicle at approximately 80 miles per hour in a 55–mile–per–hour zone.  The decedent had overtaken two northbound vehicles and was attempting to overtake the defendant's vehicle when the accident occurred.  The decedent died at the scene of the accident.  The plaintiff, individually and as administrator of the decedent's estate, commenced this action against the defendant, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death.  The defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, contending that the decedent was solely at fault in the happening of the accident.  In an order dated April 4, 2025, the Supreme Court granted the defendant's motion.  The plaintiff appeals.

“A defendant moving for summary judgment in a negligence action has the burden of establishing, prima facie, that he or she was not at fault in the happening of the subject accident” (Boulos v. Lerner–Harrington, 124 AD3d 709, 709).  Here, in support of her motion, the defendant submitted, among other things, a transcript of her deposition testimony and a dash camera video from a nonparty witness that captured the accident, which demonstrated that the decedent's negligent operation of her vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the accident and that the defendant was not liable for any damages sustained by the plaintiff or the decedent (see Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1124, 1180).  In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.