Opinion
March 9, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff's contention that he was deprived of his right to a jury trial is unpreserved for appellate review, since the plaintiff failed to object to the framed issue hearing and participated without protest ( see, Vias v. Rohan, 119 A.D.2d 672; Petty v. Field, 97 A.D.2d 538).
The defendant Avelino Casas presented sufficient evidence tending to rebut the presumption that the defendant Joseph Regan, his daughter's boyfriend, had been driving Casas's vehicle with his consent ( see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388; Leotta v. Plessinger, 8 N.Y.2d 449, 461; Wynn v. Middleton, 184 A.D.2d 1019, 1020; Schrader v. Carney, 180 A.D.2d 200, 209; State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. White, 175 A.D.2d 122; Walls v. Zuvic, 113 A.D.2d 936, 937). The uncontroverted evidence established that Casas had explicitly told Regan that he was not permitted to drive Casas's vehicle and that Casas's daughter let Regan drive the car after she arrived at his home on the date of the accident. The issue was properly submitted to the trier of fact, and its determination that there was no permissive use was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence.
Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.