Opinion
# 2015-050-064 Claim No. 125000 Motion No. M-87168
11-05-2015
SILVANA ATIENCIA v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK
The Harrison Law Group, P.C. By: Richard H. Coleman, Esq. Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman, NYS Attorney General By: John L. Belford, IV, Assistant Attorney General
Synopsis
Claimant's motion for summary judgment is denied because although claimant discharged it's initial burden, defendant demonstrated that issues of fact exist as to whether there is a non negligent explanation for this accident involving claimant's and defendant's vehicles.
Case information
| UID: | 2015-050-064 |
| Claimant(s): | SILVANA ATIENCIA |
| Claimant short name: | ATIENCIA |
| Footnote (claimant name) : | |
| Defendant(s): | THE STATE OF NEW YORK |
| Footnote (defendant name) : | |
| Third-party claimant(s): | |
| Third-party defendant(s): | |
| Claim number(s): | 125000 |
| Motion number(s): | M-87168 |
| Cross-motion number(s): | |
| Judge: | STEPHEN J. LYNCH |
| Claimant's attorney: | The Harrison Law Group, P.C. By: Richard H. Coleman, Esq. |
| Defendant's attorney: | Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman, NYS Attorney General By: John L. Belford, IV, Assistant Attorney General |
| Third-party defendant's attorney: | |
| Signature date: | November 5, 2015 |
| City: | Hauppauge |
| Comments: | |
| Official citation: | |
| Appellate results: | |
| See also (multicaptioned case) |
Decision
In an action for damages arising from a motor vehicle collision, the claimant moves for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The defendant opposes the motion.
The essential facts alleged herein are that on August 27, 2014, the claimant was traveling in the left westbound lane of Southern State Parkway three miles west of exit 33 when a vehicle operated by one Saprina C. Rosier, a Safety and Security Officer for the New York State Office of People with Developmental Disabilities, came in contact with the rear of the claimant's vehicle.
Here, the claimant's motion was interposed after joinder of issue which is as provided for in CPLR § 3212. The defendant attempts to rely on the fact that depositions have not taken place herein. However, such circumstance does not preclude a party from seeking summary judgement (see CPLR 3212 ["any party may move for summary judgment in any action, after issue has been joined"]).
The claimant discharged her initial burden upon this summary judgment motion (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]) by the claimant's affidavit demonstrating that the defendant's vehicle struck claimant's vehicle in the rear end while both vehicles were in the left westbound lane on the Southern State Parkway on August 27, 2014. However, through the proof adduced by the defendant, specifically, the affidavit of driver Rosier, the defendant has demonstrated that issues of fact exist as to whether there is a non-negligent explanation for this accident involving claimant's and defendant's vehicles (see John v Leyba, 38 AD3d 469 [2d Dept 2007]; Carhuayano v J & R Hacking, 38 AD3d 496 [2d Dept 2006]).
Accordingly, the motion by the claimant for summary judgment is denied.
November 5, 2015
Hauppauge, New York
STEPHEN J. LYNCH
Judge of the Court of Claims The following papers were read and considered by the Court on the claimant's motion for summary judgment: 1. Notice of Motion, Attorney's Affirmation in Support. 2. Affirmation in Opposition with Exhibit 1. 3. Affidavit of Saprina C. Rosier filed August 20, 2015. 4. Claimant's Reply Affirmation.