From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosa v. Colonial Transit, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 30, 2000
276 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued September 28, 2000

October 30, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants Ray's School Trans. Co., Inc., Richard K. Wilkerson, and Sunny Side School Transportation Corp. appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), dated August 6, 1999, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.

Diamond, Paino, Cardo, King, Peters Fodera, Brooklyn, N Y (Deborah F. Peters of counsel), for appellants.

Michael Stewart Frankel, New York, N.Y. (Richard H. Bliss of counsel), for plaintiffs-respondents.

Dwyer Brennan, New York, N.Y. (Daniel J. Dwyer of counsel), for defendants-respondents Colonial Transit, Inc., and Dinelex School Transportation, Inc.

Hawkins, Feretic, Daly, Maroney Hayes, P.C., New York, N Y (William E. Fay III of counsel), for defendant-respondent Mervin Harding.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

Contrary to the appellants' contention, the Supreme Court properly denied their motion for summary judgment. Although a rear-end collision with a stopped vehicle creates a prima facie case of liability with respect to the operator of the moving vehicle (see, Martin v. Pullafico, 272 A.D.2d 305; Mundo v. City of Yonkers, 249 A.D.2d 522; Migdol v. Striker, 215 A.D.2d 358), a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the driver of the stopped bus, the appellant Richard K. Wilkerson, contributed to the accident by making a sudden stop (see, Gildersleeve v. Leo, 274 A.D.2d 547; [2d Dept., July 31, 2000]; Maschka v. Newman, 262 A.D.2d 615; Mundo v. City of Yonkers, supra; Migdol v. Striker, supra). Furthermore, an award of summary judgment would be inappropriate in this case since Wilkerson has not appeared for court-ordered examinations before trial, thereby depriving the plaintiffs and codefendants of an opportunity to obtain evidence pertinent to the cause of the accident (see, CPLR 3212[f]; Hoxha v. City of New York, 265 A.D.2d 379; Lantigua v. Mallick, 263 A.D.2d 467; Campbell v. City of New York, 220 A.D.2d 476; Soto v. City of Long Beach, 197 A.D.2d 615).


Summaries of

Rosa v. Colonial Transit, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 30, 2000
276 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Rosa v. Colonial Transit, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:FRANCESCA ROSA, ETC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. COLONIAL TRANSIT…

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

Date published: Oct 30, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 781 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 426

Citing Cases

Hong v. Maher

Plaintiffs counter with a host of cases, drawn from an opinion by the Honorable I. Leo Glasser of the Eastern…

Torres v. Mamadou

In this case, however, there is a dispute about whether Torres changed lanes before he suddenly stopped in…