Harrinarain v. Sisters of St. Joseph
| Decision Date | 19 June 2019 |
| Docket Number | 2018–11973,Index No. 701370/18 |
| Parties | Jasmattie HARRINARAIN, appellant, v. SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH, et al., respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
173 A.D.3d 983
104 N.Y.S.3d 661
Jasmattie HARRINARAIN, appellant,
v.
SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH, et al., respondents.
2018–11973
Index No. 701370/18
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued—February 19, 2019
June 19, 2019
Poltielov Law Firm, P.C. (Law Offices of Regis A. Gallet, LLC, Forest Hills, NY, of counsel), for appellant.
Kennedys CMK LLP, New York, N.Y. (Michael R. Schneider and Hilary Simon of counsel), for respondents.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Darrell L. Gavrin, J.), dated August 28, 2018. The order denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability is granted.
The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries she allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred at the intersection of 59th Avenue and 146th Street in Queens. The accident occurred when a vehicle operated
by the plaintiff collided with a vehicle operated by the defendant Grace A. Seckendorf (hereinafter the defendant driver) and owned by the defendant Sisters of St. Joseph. Prior to the accident, the defendants' vehicle was traveling on 59th Avenue, which was governed by a stop sign, while the plaintiff's vehicle was traveling on 146th Street, which was not governed by any traffic control devices. The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability, the Supreme Court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appeals.
The plaintiff established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Arrospide v. Murphy
...bumper, which is admissible under the admission against interest exception to the hearsay rule (see Harrinarain v. Sisters of St. Joseph, 173 A.D.3d 983, 104 N.Y.S.3d 661 [2d Dept. 2019]; Lebron v. Mensalt, 161 A.D.3d 972,76 N.Y.S.3d 219 [2d Dept. 2018]; Jackson v. Trust, 103 A.D.2d 851,852......
-
Arrospide v. Murphy
... ... interest exception to the hearsay rule (see Harrinarain ... v. Sisters of St. Joseph, 173 A.D.3d 983, 104 N.Y.S.3d ... 661 [2d Dept. 2019]; Lebron v ... ...
-
Magee v. Zeman
...(Rodriguez v. City of New York, 31 N.Y.3d 312, 76 N.Y.S.3d 898 [2018]; Harrinarain v. Sisters of St. Joseph, -N.Y.S.3d-, 173 A.D.3d 983 [2d Dept. 2019]). Here, however, plaintiff has the burden on a motion dismiss to demonstrate that same is without merit (see Poon v. Nisanov, 162 A.D.3d 80......
-
Perschbach v. Daw
...07929 [2d Dept 2019]; Gaston v Vertsberger, 176 A.D.3d 919, 2019 NY Slip Op 07384 [2d Dept. 2019]; Harrinarain v Sisters of St. Joseph, 173 A.D.3d 983, 104 N.Y.S.3d 661 [2d Dept 2019]). The mere hope or speculation that evidence sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment may be unco......