Fersko v Haynes
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Motor vehicle negligence and summary judgment in a rear-end collision personal injury action.
The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied Robert P. Kassar's cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims against him.
The Appellate Division reversed the denial of Kassar's cross-motion and granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims insofar as asserted against him.
Kassar established prima facie that his vehicle was stopped in traffic and was struck in the rear, showing he was not at fault in the happening of the collision. Rodriguez's opposition failed to raise a triable issue of fact, even when viewed in the light most favorable to him.
Background
The plaintiff commenced separate actions, later consolidated, to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained in September 2014. The plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle driven by Merido W. Rodriguez when that vehicle collided with a vehicle driven by Robert P. Kassar. Kassar cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims against him. Rodriguez opposed the cross-motion, while the plaintiff did not.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Kings County, denied Kassar's cross-motion for summary judgment insofar as it sought dismissal of the complaint and all cross-claims against him.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and granted Kassar's cross-motion. The court held that although there can be more than one proximate cause of an accident, Kassar met his burden by demonstrating that his stopped vehicle was struck in the rear and that he was not at fault. Rodriguez failed to submit evidence sufficient to create a triable issue of fact.
Legal Significance
This decision reinforces that a driver whose vehicle is stopped in traffic and is struck from the rear can establish entitlement to summary judgment by showing lack of fault in the accident. It also underscores that an opposing party must present evidence creating a genuine factual dispute; mere opposition is insufficient where the record shows the moving defendant was not negligent.
In New York rear-end collision cases, a stopped driver who is hit from behind may obtain summary judgment dismissing claims against him if the evidence shows he was not at fault and the opposition cannot raise a triable issue of fact.