Cenovski v. Lee

• Decision Date: 22 November 1999
• Citation: 698 N.Y.S.2d 868,266 A.D.2d 424
• Parties: Namik CENOVSKI, et al., appellants, v. David L. LEE, respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 868

698 N.Y.S.2d 868

Namik CENOVSKI, et al., appellants, v. David L. LEE, respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Second Department, New York.

Nov. 22, 1999.

Benedict Morelli & Associates (Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, New York, N.Y. [Benedict P. Morelli and Brian J. Isaac] of counsel), for appellants.

Vincent P. Crisci, New York, N.Y. (Michael V. Campanile of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Cusick, J.), dated December 3, 1998, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment (see, Namisnak v. Martin, 244 A.D.2d 258, 664 N.Y.S.2d 435; Perez v. Brux Cab Corp., 251 A.D.2d 157, 674 N.Y.S.2d 343; Matt v. Tricil [N.Y.], 260 A.D.2d 811, 687 N.Y.S.2d 828). Viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, the evidence establishes that the plaintiff Namik Cenovski was negligent, as a matter of law, when he failed to yield the right-of-way to the defendant in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1142(b) (see, Nunziata v. Birchell, 238 A.D.2d 555, 656 N.Y.S.2d 383; Anastasio v. Scheer, 239 A.D.2d 823, 658 N.Y.S.2d 467; Dellavecchia v. Zorros, 231 A.D.2d 549, 647 N.Y.S.2d 291). The defendant, who had the right-of-way, was entitled to anticipate that Cenovski would obey traffic laws which required him to yield (see, Namisnak v. Martin, supra). Finally, the record does not support the plaintiffs' contention that a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the defendant was negligent in the operation of his truck (see, Matt v. Tricil [N.Y.], Inc., supra; Namisnak v. Martin, supra; Perez v. Brux Cab Corp., supra).

S. MILLER, J.P., THOMPSON, KRAUSMAN, FLORIO, and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.