From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arrowitz v. Arrowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 2001
279 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted December 6, 2000

January 11, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Northern Westchester Hospital appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (DiBlasi, J.), entered February 3, 2000, which granted the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability against it and denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Keenan Powers Andrews, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Dennis J. Brady of counsel), for appellant.

Lucchese D'Ammora, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Victor J. D'Ammora of counsel), for respondent.

Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, DANIEL F. LUCIANO NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries which he allegedly sustained when a vehicle operated by an employee of the appellant, Northern Westchester Hospital, crossed over onto the wrong side of the road and struck the vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger. The plaintiff established a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the appellant`s employee (see, Montero v. Muller, 269 A.D.2d 576; Studnick v. Selesnick, 265 A.D.2d 321; Cummins v. Rose, 185 A.D.2d 839; Morowitz v. Naughton, 150 A.D.2d 536; Tomaselli v. Goldstein, 104 A.D.2d 872). The burden then shifted to the appellant to demonstrate by admissible proof the existence of an exculpatory explanation for the collision (see, Selimanjin v. New York City Hous. Auth., 275 A.D.2d 408; Studnick v. Selesnick, supra; Viegas v. Esposito, 135 A.D.2d 708). The appellant failed to meet its burden of demonstrating by admissible proof the existence of a nonnegligent explanation for the head-on collision, or that its employee was not negligent in the happening of this accident as a matter of law.


Summaries of

Arrowitz v. Arrowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 2001
279 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Arrowitz v. Arrowitz

Case Details

Full title:BRENT ARROWITZ, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. RAND ARROWITZ, DEFENDANT, NORTHERN…

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

Date published: Jan 11, 2001

Citations

279 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
719 N.Y.S.2d 115

Citing Cases

Yousefpour v. Fancher

Plaintiffs argue that summary judgment is proper because New York courts have held that, when a plaintiff…

Vallejo v. Dominos

Defendant woefully has failed in its duty to offer a non-negligent explanation for the crash. See Pfaffenbach…