Opinion
INDEX NO. 158543/2016
05-22-2019
ANTHONY CHAN, Plaintiff, v. PATRICIA PRIORE, JOSEPH PRIORE, STEPHEN KUMAX, EAN HOLDINGS LLC DBA ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR, ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS INC DBA ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR Defendant.
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 54 MOTION DATE 01/07/2019 MOTION SEQ. NO. 001
DECISION AND ORDER
HON. ADAM SILVERA: The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53 were read on this motion to/for JUDGMENT - SUMMARY. Before the Court is defendant Stephen Kumar i/s/h/a Stephen Kumax (hereinafter "Kumar") motion for an Order granting Kumar summary judgment on the issue of liability and defendants Ean Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car (hereinafter "EAN Holdings, LLC") motion to dismiss the plaintiff's Complaint and all cross-claims against said defendants.
The branch of defendants' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability in davor of defendant Kumar is granted. The Accident at issue involved two vehicles, one owned by defendant EAN Holdings, LLC and operated by defendant Kumar and the other owned by defendant Joseph Priore and operated by defendant Patricia Priore. Plaintiff Anthony Chan was a passenger in the Kumar/EAN vehicle.
As set forth in the Police Report, and through the testimony of all parties, the Kumar/EAN vehicle was stopped in traffic when the Priore vehicle struck the rear of the Kumar/EAN vehicle (Mot, Exh A at ¶ 51-52; Exh E at 31, 42, 179, & 180' Exh F at 37-38, &41; Exh G at 44-46; and Exh H). Defendants have made out a prima facie case of negligence, and the burden shifts to the opposing party to raise a triable issue of fact (See Winegrad v New York University Medical Center, 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; see also Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 560 (1980).
"The proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case" (Winegrad v New York University Medical Center, 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Once such entitlement has been demonstrated by the moving party, the burden shifts to the party opposing the motion to "demonstrate by admissible evidence the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial of the action or tender an acceptable excuse for his failure ... to do [so]" (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 560 [1980]).
"A rear-end collision with a stopped vehicle, or a vehicle slowing down, establishes a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the operator of the rear-ending vehicle, which may be rebutted if that driver can provide a non-negligent explanation for the accident" (Baez v MM Truck and Body Repair, Inc., 151 AD3d 473, 476 [1st Dep't 2017]).
Here, it is undisputed that defendant Stephen Kumar was operating a stopped vehicle that was struck in the rear. Thus, defendant Kumar has made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability and the burden shifts to defendants to raise an issue of fact or non-negligent explanation for the accident. In opposition plaintiff and co-defendants fail to raise an issue of fact as to the occurrence of the accident. Thus, the branch of defendants' motion for an Order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant Kumar on the issue of liability is granted.
As to the branch of defendants' motion to dismiss all claims against and defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car the Court finds that said defendants are not liable for the accident at issue.
Defendants' motion contends that defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car are not liable for an accident that occurred on July 1, 2015. Defendants argue plaintiff's claims against defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car are barred pursuant to the Graves Amendment (See 49 U.S.C. 30106 [providing that an owner engaged in the trade or business of renting or leasing motor vehicles and there is no negligence or criminal wrongdoing on the part of the owner]).
Defendants have successfully demonstrated that defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car being in the business of leasing motor vehicles, are not vicariously liable the accident at issue and that claims against said defendants are barred by the Graves Amendment. The opposition fails to demonstrate that defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car were independently negligent for the accident at issue. Thus, defendants' motion is granted in its entirety. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the branch of defendants' motion for an order for summary judgment on the issue of liability in favor of defendant Stephen Kumar i/s/h/a Stephen Kumax is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that defendants' motion for an order to dismiss all claims against defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed in its entirety as against defendant Stephen Kumar i/s/h/a Stephen Kumar and defendants EAN Holdings, LLC i/s/h/a EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. i/s/h/a Enterprise Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Enterprise Rent-A-Car with costs and disbursements to said defendants as taxed by the Clerk of the Court, and the Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly in favor of said defendants; and it is further
ORDERED that the action is severed and continued against the remaining defendants; and it is further
ORDERED that the caption be amended to reflect the dismissal and that all future papers filed with the court bear the amended caption; and it is further
ORDERED that counsel for the moving party shall serve a copy of this order with notice of entry upon the County Clerk (Room 141B) and the Clerk of the Trial Support Office (Room 158), who are directed to mark the court's records to reflect the change in the caption herein; and it is further
ORDERED that within 30 days of entry, defendants shall serve a copy of this decision/order upon all parties with notice of entry.
This constitutes the Decision/Order of the Court. 5/22/2019
DATE
/s/ _________
ADAM SILVERA, J.S.C.