Tornabene v. Seickel

• Citation: 129 N.Y.S.3d 110,186 A.D.3d 645
• Decision Date: 12 August 2020
• Docket Number: 2019–05412,Index No. 100787/16
• Parties: Mariann TORNABENE, Respondent, v. Thomas SEICKEL, Defendant, Giuseppe Tornabene, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court Appellate Division

186 A.D.3d 645
129 N.Y.S.3d 110

Mariann TORNABENE, Respondent,
v.
Thomas SEICKEL, Defendant,

Giuseppe Tornabene, Appellant.

2019–05412
Index No. 100787/16

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Argued—February 11, 2020
August 12, 2020

129 N.Y.S.3d 111

Votto & Albee, PLLC, Staten Island, N.Y. (Christopher J. Albee of counsel), for appellant.

Louis Grandelli, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Stephen D. Wagner III of counsel), for respondent.

Deirdre J. Tobin (Lewis Johs Avallone Aviles, LLP, Islandia, N.Y. [Amy E. Bedell ], of counsel), for defendant Thomas Seickel.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, BETSY BARROS, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

186 A.D.3d 645

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Giuseppe Tornabene appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Judith N. McMahon, J.), dated February 14, 2019. The order denied that defendant's

186 A.D.3d 646

motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when a vehicle in which she was a passenger, driven by the defendant Giuseppe Tornabene, collided with a pickup truck driven by the defendant Thomas Seickel at the intersection of State Highway 10 and West Main Street in Stamford. Seickel's vehicle was traveling on West Main Street, which is controlled by a stop sign. Tornabene's

129 N.Y.S.3d 112

vehicle, traveling on State Highway 10, was not governed by a traffic control device. The plaintiff commenced this personal injury action against Seickel and Tornabene. Tornabene moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, contending that Seickel's failure to yield the right-of-way to Tornabene's vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the accident. The Supreme Court denied the motion, and Tornabene appeals.

"While the driver with the right-of-way is entitled to assume that other drivers will obey the traffic laws requiring them to yield" ( M.M.T. v. Relyea , 177 A.D.3d 1013, 1014, 114 N.Y.S.3d 385 ; see Richardson v. Cablevision Sys. Corp. , 173 A.D.3d 1083, 1085, 104 N.Y.S.3d 655 ), the "driver [with] the right-of-way has a duty to exercise reasonable care to avoid a collision with another vehicle already in the intersection" ( Lorentz v. Ruiz , 129 A.D.3d 795, 796, 11 N.Y.S.3d 246 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Rodriguez v. Klein , 116 A.D.3d 939, 939, 983 N.Y.S.2d 851 ; Demant v. Rochevet , 43 A.D.3d 981, 842 N.Y.S.2d 74 ). Moreover, "a driver is negligent...