Opinion
6112 Index 22888/14E
03-27-2018
Ashley MORALES, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Richard CHUQUILLANQUI, Defendant, Kenneth Dominguez, Defendant–Respondent.
Yadgarov & Associates, PLLC, New York (Ronald S. Ramo of counsel), for appellant. Adams & Kaplan, Yonkers (Hannah Whiteker of counsel), for respondent.
Yadgarov & Associates, PLLC, New York (Ronald S. Ramo of counsel), for appellant.
Adams & Kaplan, Yonkers (Hannah Whiteker of counsel), for respondent.
Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Webber, Oing, Moulton, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lizbeth Gonzalez, J.), entered December 20, 2016, which granted the motion of defendant Kenneth Dominguez for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against him, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Dominguez established entitlement to judgment as matter of law by demonstrating the applicability of the emergency doctrine in this action for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident; plaintiff was a passenger in defendant Chuquillanqui's vehicle. Dominguez submitted evidence showing that the accident occurred when Chuquillanqui attempted an illegal U-turn from the far-right lane of a two-way road that had two lanes traveling in each direction. Dominguez was operating a vehicle traveling in the same direction as Chuquillanqui's vehicle, but in the left lane at some distance back from Chuquillanqui's vehicle. Dominguez testified that he had only had a couple of seconds to react when Chuquillanqui abruptly began the U-turn across his right of way in the left lane, and that he unsuccessfully attempted to avoid the collision by turning his vehicle to the left (see e.g. Ward v. Cox, 38 A.D.3d 313, 831 N.Y.S.2d 406 [1st Dept. 2007] ).
Plaintiff's opposition was insufficient to raise factual issues as to whether an emergency situation existed prior to the collision, and as to whether Dominguez's actions before the accident were reasonable under the circumstances. While the "reasonableness of a defendant driver's reaction to an emergency is normally left to the trier of fact," in "egregious circumstances," as here, the issue may be resolved on summary judgment ( Maisonet v. Roman, 139 A.D.3d 121, 125, 30 N.Y.S.3d 24 [1st Dept. 2016], appeal dismissed 27 N.Y.3d 1062, 35 N.Y.S.3d 295, 54 N.E.3d 1166 [2016] ).