From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thoma v. Ronai

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Sep 9, 1993
82 N.Y.2d 736 (N.Y. 1993)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Thoma, the plaintiff was crossing East 79th Street along the west side of First Avenue, with the walk signal in her favor, when she was hit while in the crosswalk by a van that had been driving northbound on First Avenue, which made a left turn onto East 79th Street heading westbound.

Summary of this case from Quintavalle v. Perez
See 4 Summaries

Opinion

Decided September 9, 1993

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Charles E. Ramos, J.

Sean E. Stanton, New York City, for appellant.

Seligson, Rothman Rothman, New York City (Alyne I. Diamond of counsel), for respondent.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

Plaintiff commenced this negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by her as a pedestrian when she was struck by defendant's automobile in an intersection. Defendant interposes comparative negligence.

The submissions to the nisi prius court on plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, consisting of her affidavit and the police accident report, demonstrate that she may have been negligent in failing to look to her left while crossing the intersection. Plaintiff's concession that she did not observe the vehicle that struck her raises a factual question of her reasonable care. Accordingly, plaintiff did not satisfy her burden of demonstrating the absence of any material issue of fact and the lower courts correctly denied summary judgment.

Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SIMONS, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., BELLACOSA and SMITH concur in memorandum; Judge LEVINE taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, etc.

Summaries of

Thoma v. Ronai

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Sep 9, 1993
82 N.Y.2d 736 (N.Y. 1993)

In Thoma, the plaintiff was crossing East 79th Street along the west side of First Avenue, with the walk signal in her favor, when she was hit while in the crosswalk by a van that had been driving northbound on First Avenue, which made a left turn onto East 79th Street heading westbound.

Summary of this case from Quintavalle v. Perez

In Thoma v Ronai (82 NY2d 736), a case directly on point, the Court of Appeals, in affirming an order issued by the Appellate Division, First Department, expressly concluded that the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability was properly denied where the plaintiffs submissions failed to eliminate a triable issue of fact regarding her comparative negligence.

Summary of this case from Roman v. Limousine

In Thoma v Ronai (82 N.Y.2d 736 [1993]), the plaintiff was a pedestrian struck by the defendant's automobile at an intersection.

Summary of this case from McIntosh v. Leung

In Thoma v Ronai, 82 NY2d 736 (1993), the Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff who establishes a prima facie claim of negligence is not entitled to summary judgment where there exist triable issues of fact as to comparative negligence.

Summary of this case from Rivera v. City of New York
Case details for

Thoma v. Ronai

Case Details

Full title:MARNA THOMA, Appellant, v. SANDOR RONAI, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Sep 9, 1993

Citations

82 N.Y.2d 736 (N.Y. 1993)
602 N.Y.S.2d 795
622 N.E.2d 296

Citing Cases

Shenkerman v. Goycoechea

In Roman v A1 Limousine, Inc. ( 76 AD3d 552 [2d Dept 2010]), a memorandum opinion that recites no facts, the…

Roman v. Limousine

Although we affirm the order of the Supreme Court, we do so on different grounds from those relied upon by…

137 Citing Cases