SORRENTINO v. PAGANICA

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

Anthony SORRENTINO, respondent, v. Elvira PAGANICA, appellant.

Decided: May 31, 2005

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, and ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ. Chesney & Murphy, LLP, Baldwin, N.Y. (Peter J. Verdirame of counsel), for appellant. Eaton & Torrenzano, LLP, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Robert L. Stinson of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Johnson, J.), dated July 15, 2004, which denied her motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

In opposition to the defendant's prima facie demonstration that the sole proximate cause of the plaintiff's alleged injury was his own negligence in placing his fingers into the chute of the defendant's snow blower, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Amaya v. L'Hommedieu, 6 A.D.3d 638, 775 N.Y.S.2d 181;  see also Liriano v. Hobart Corp., 92 N.Y.2d 232, 677 N.Y.S.2d 764, 700 N.E.2d 303;  Derdiarian v. Felix Contr. Corp., 51 N.Y.2d 308, 434 N.Y.S.2d 166, 414 N.E.2d 666).   Thus, the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been granted.

Copied to clipboard