From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Islar v. Farrar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 30, 2000
272 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

May 30, 2000

In related actions to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs Kathy Islar and Charles Gonzales appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), dated July 7, 1999, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Pauline Farrar and Matthew Farrar which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Before: Santucci, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Feuerstein, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

These actions arise out of a three-car accident on July 15, 1994, at the intersection of Avenue T and East 17th Street in Brooklyn. The appellants, Kathy Islar and Charles Gonzales, were passengers in a vehicle owned by the respondent Matthew Farrar and operated by the respondent Pauline Farrar, which was traveling west on Avenue T. A vehicle operated by Joseph Berchini, proceeding east on Avenue T, and a vehicle operated by Arkadiy Snol, traveling north on East 17th Street, collided at the intersection, and the Berchini vehicle was propelled into the westbound lane where it struck the Farrar vehicle.

The appellants subsequently commenced this action against the Farrars, Berchini, and others. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment dismissing their complaint insofar as asserted against the Farrars.

In their motion, the respondents established that the accident was not caused by any negligence on the part of Pauline Farrar, who was in no position to avoid the collision ( see, Rodriguez v. Schwartz, 257 A.D.2d 655; Velez v. Diaz, 227 A.D.2d 615; Florio v. Baierlein, 225 A.D.2d 584; Wright v. Morozinis, 220 A.D.2d 496). The appellants failed to come forward with any evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the respondents' liability for the accident ( see, Florio v. Baierlein, supra; Wright v. Morozinis, supra). Consequently, the Supreme Court properly dismissed their complaint insofar as asserted against the respondents.


Summaries of

Islar v. Farrar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 30, 2000
272 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Islar v. Farrar

Case Details

Full title:KATHY ISLAR et al., Appellants, v. PAULINE FARRAR et al., Respondents, et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 30, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
709 N.Y.S.2d 817

Citing Cases

Phillips v. Silvestro

However, in opposing a summary judgment motion, mere conclusions, unsubstantiated allegations or assertions…

Merchant v. Greyhound Bus Lines

The Supreme Court properly granted the respective motions of the defendant Greyhound Bus Lines, Inc.…