Appellate Court Reverses Summary Judgment, Finds Triable Issues of Fact in Vehicle Collision Liability Dispute

On appeal, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division reversed a trial court’s order granting summary judgment on the issue of liability because the record demonstrated that there is a legitimate issue of fact regarding liability between the parties.

The plaintiff brought this liability action to recover damages for personal injuries he allegedly sustained due to a collision between his vehicle and a vehicle owned by the defendant that was being operated by a co-defendant. During the trial, the plaintiff and the defendant both submitted evidence that offered contradictory accounts of the alleged collision.

Upon reviewing the record and citing substantive state case law, the appellate court noted that a plaintiff in a negligence action moving for summary judgment on the issue of liability must establish, prima facie, that the defendant breached a duty owed to the plaintiff and that the defendant’s negligence was a proximate cause of the alleged injuries.

However, the court also pointed out that a plaintiff’s comparative negligence may be decided in the context of a plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability where, as in this case, the plaintiff also seeks dismissal of the defendant’s affirmative defense, alleging comparative negligence. Therefore, the appellate court concluded that because both parties offered differing accounts of the collision, there are triable issues of fact that challenge the plaintiff’s prima facie case, requiring the plaintiff’s motion to be denied.