From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanford v. Stillitano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 14, 1997
241 A.D.2d 489 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

July 14, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the appellants' motion for summary judgment in this chain-reaction automobile accident case. The appellants claim that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law because their vehicle was hit from behind while lawfully stopped in traffic waiting to exit the Verrazano Bridge ( see, Leal v. Wolff, 224 A.D.2d 392; Collazo v Lewis, 210 A.D.2d 451; Smith v. Cafiero, 203 A.D.2d 355). However, the appellants failed to carry their evidentiary burden ( see, Lehmann v. Sheaves, 231 A.D.2d 687). Indeed, there was evidence suggesting that the appellants had been following the car driven by the defendant John Stillitano too closely and at too great a speed, and that the appellants and Stillitano stopped abruptly. Moreover, there were multiple impacts, and Stillitano's deposition testimony gives rise to an inference that the appellants' vehicle may have hit his car first, before being hit by defendant Alfreda Johnson's car, in which the plaintiff was a passenger. Accordingly, the appellants did not demonstrate their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see, Omrami v. Socrates, 227 A.D.2d 459; Cofrancesco v. Murino, 225 A.D.2d 648; Acampora v. Davis, 203 A.D.2d 399).

Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, O'Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sanford v. Stillitano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 14, 1997
241 A.D.2d 489 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Sanford v. Stillitano

Case Details

Full title:JANICE SANFORD, Respondent, v. JOHN STILLITANO et al., Defendants, and…

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

Date published: Jul 14, 1997

Citations

241 A.D.2d 489 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
660 N.Y.S.2d 67

Citing Cases

Velez v. Raz Taxi Corp.

rt, 137 A.D.3d 786, 787, 25 N.Y.S.3d 893; Brill v. City of New York, 2 N.Y.3d 648, 652, 781 N.Y.S.2d 261, 814…

Thoman v. Rivera

dified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the appellant payable by…