Roth v. Barreto

Decision Date31 December 2001
Citation289 A.D.2d 557,735 N.Y.S.2d 197
PartiesSAUL ROTH, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>ADAM E. BARRETO et al., Defendants, and VINCENZO'S OF NORTH MERRICK LTD., Appellant. (Action No. 1.)<BR>LENNY ROTH et al., Respondents,<BR>v.<BR>ADAM E. BARRETO et al., Defendants, and VINCENZO'S OF NORTH MERRICK LTD., Appellant. (Action No. 2.)
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Santucci, J. P., Altman, Florio, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On February 18, 1999, at about 6:55 P.M., a vehicle operated by Adam E. Barreto, a defendant in both actions, collided with a vehicle operated by the plaintiff in Action No. 1, Saul Roth, in front of the appellant's pizza store. The plaintiffs allege that Barreto was delivering pizza pies for the appellant at the time of the accident. The appellant moved for summary judgment in both actions, alleging that Barreto was not its employee on the date of the accident or at any other time. In support of its motion, the appellant offered the deposition testimonies of Barreto, his mother, and the appellant's owner, stating that Barreto was not an employee of the appellant. Barreto testified that he had bought two pizza pies that night from the appellant for his own consumption.

In opposition to the motion for summary judgment, the plaintiffs offered the deposition testimony of Saul Roth and the sworn affidavit of an off-duty police officer. Saul Roth testified that, upon confronting Barreto immediately after the accident, Barreto stated "I'm sorry. I'm in a hurry. I'm making deliveries." Furthermore, both Saul Roth and the off-duty police officer observed the appellant's owner or manager and another employee remove 8 to 10 pizza-pie boxes from the rear seat of Barreto's vehicle and carry them into the pizza store.

The court's function on a motion for summary judgment is not to resolve issues of fact or to determine matters of credibility but merely to determine whether such issues exist (see, Barr v County of Albany, 50 NY2d 247; Rebecchi v Whitmore, 172 AD2d 600, 601; Daliendo v Johnson, 147 AD2d 312, 317). There exist triable issues of fact as to whether Barreto was employed by the appellant and acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident (see, Carrion v Orbit Messenger, 82 NY2d 742; Matter of Rivera, 69 NY2d 679, cert denied sub nom. State Line Delivery Serv. v Rivera, 481 US 1049; Matter of 12 Cornelia St., 56 NY2d 895, 897). Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion for summary...

To continue reading

Request your trial
134 cases
  • Magee v. Zeman
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • August 28, 2019
    ...who must produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of the material issues of fact (Roth v. Barreto, 289 A.D.2d 557, 735 N.Y.S.2d 197 [2d Dept 2001]; Rebecchi v. Whitmore, 172 A.D.2d 600, 568 N.Y.S.2d 423 [2d Dept 1991]; O'Neill v. Town of Fishkill, 134 A.D.2......
  • Dominguez v. Algieri
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • August 26, 2020
    ...which must produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of the material issues of fact (Roth v Barreto, 289 A.D.2d 557, 735 N.Y.S.2d 197 [2d Dept 2001]; Rebecchi v Whitmore, 172 A.D.2d 600, 568 N.Y.S.2d 423 [2d Dept 1991]; O'Neill v Town of Fishkill, 134 A.D.2d......
  • Dominguez v. Algieri
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • August 26, 2020
    ...... must produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient. to require a trial of the material issues of fact (Roth v. Barreto, 289 A.D.2d 557, 735 N.Y.S.2d 197 [2d Dept. 2001]; Rebecchi v Whitmore, 172 A.D.2d 600, 568. N.Y.S.2d 423 [2d Dept ......
  • Geico Gen. Ins. Co. v. The Town of Islip
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • November 18, 2020
    ...which must produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of the material issues of fact (Roth v Barreto, 289 A.D.2d 557, 735 N.Y.S.2d 197 [2d Dept 2001]; Rebecchi v Whitmore, 172 A.D.2d 600, 568 N.Y.S.2d 423 [2d Dept 1991]; O'Neill v Town of Fishkill, 134 A.D.2d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT