Sirot v. Troiano
| Decision Date | 13 October 2009 |
| Docket Number | 2008-06459. |
| Citation | 66 A.D.3d 763,886 N.Y.S.2d 504,2009 NY Slip Op 7397 |
| Parties | SUSAN SIROT et al., Respondents, v. CHARLES D. TROIANO, Appellant, and ELIHU A. BOND, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs to the defendant-respondent.
On the evening of October 21, 2006, the plaintiffs were passengers in a vehicle operated by the defendant Elihu A. Bond (hereinafter the Bond vehicle), which was traveling eastbound on 57th Road in Queens. At the same time, a vehicle operated by the defendant Charles D. Troiano (hereinafter the Troiano vehicle) was traveling northbound on Cloverdale Boulevard, also in Queens. The Bond vehicle was hit, on its right side, by the Troiano vehicle when it was approximately three-quarters of the way through the intersection of Cloverdale Boulevard and 57th Road. A stop sign at the subject intersection controls traffic traveling on 57th Road, but no stop sign or other device controls traffic traveling on Cloverdale Boulevard.
A driver who has the right-of-way is entitled to anticipate that other motorists will obey the traffic laws and yield the right-of-way (see Cox v Weil, 66 AD3d 634 [2009]; Parisi v Mitchell, 280 AD2d 589 [2001]; Cenovski v Lee, 266 AD2d 424 [1999]). However, "a driver who lawfully enters an intersection . . . may still be found partially at fault for an accident if he or she fails to use reasonable care to avoid a collision with another vehicle in the intersection" (Siegel v Sweeney, 266 AD2d 200, 202 [1999]; see Borukhow v Cuff, 48 AD3d 726 [2008]; Romano v 202 Corp., 305 AD2d 576, 577 [2003]). Here, Troiano demonstrated his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against him by his deposition testimony that he was traveling at a speed of 20 to 30 miles per hour and had traveled five to six feet into the intersection when his vehicle was stuck by the Bond vehicle, which he saw only "a [f]raction of a second" before the impact. However, in opposition, Bond raised a triable issue of fact as to whether Troiano was comparatively negligent in failing to use reasonable care to avoid the accident. Bond testified, at his deposition, that when he reached the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Luke v. McFadden
...accident if he or she fails to use reasonable care to avoid a collision with another vehicle in the intersection’ ” ( Sirot v. Troiano, 66 A.D.3d 763, 764, 886 N.Y.S.2d 504, quoting Siegel v. Sweeney, 266 A.D.2d 200, 202, 697 N.Y.S.2d 317;see Antaki v. Mateo, 100 A.D.3d 579, 580, 954 N.Y.S.......
-
Kaur v. Coley
...fault in the subject accident's occurrence (see Tornabene v. Seickel, 186 A.D.3d 645. 129 N.Y.S.3d 110 [2d Dept 2020]; Sirot v. Troiano, 66 A.D.3d 763, 886 N.Y.S.2d 504 [2d Dept 2009]; Nevarez v. S.R.M. Mgt. Corp., 58 A.D.3d 295. 298. 867 N.Y.S.2d 431 [1 st Dept 2008]). Moreover, "[a] drive......
-
Billis v. Tunjian
...as to the moving party's comparative fault ( see Lu Yuan Yang v. Howsal Cab Corp., 106 A.D.3d 1055, 966 N.Y.S.2d 167; Sirot v. Troiano, 66 A.D.3d 763, 764, 886 N.Y.S.2d 504). A bare allegation that the lead vehicle stopped short is insufficient to rebut the inference of negligence on the pa......
-
Araus v. Lagatta
... ... 580, 954 N.Y.S.2d 540 [2d Dept 2012]; Steiner v ... Dincesen, 95 A.D.3d 877, 878, 943 N.Y.S.2d 585 [2d Dept ... 2012]; Sirot v Troiano, 66 A.D.3d 763, 764, 886 ... N.Y.S.2d 504 [2d Dept 2009]). A driver is negligent when he ... or she fails to see that which should be ... ...