Summary
holding that the court erred in not granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability where the defendants' assertion that the plaintiff was comparatively negligent was "speculative and unsupported by the record"
Summary of this case from Brill v. Queens Lumber Co.Opinion
6193.
May 31, 2005.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered on or about September 21, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiff partial summary judgment on the issue of negligence against defendant Gyamfi except with respect to plaintiff's comparative negligence, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting plaintiff summary judgment on the issue of liability against Gyamfi without exception, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
Before: Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
The IAS court erred in not granting plaintiff's motion without exception, since the evidence submitted by both parties demonstrated that Gyamfi was negligent as a matter of law in backing up the vehicle into plaintiff pedestrian without taking adequate precautions (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1211 [a]). Defendants' assertion that an issue of fact was raised as to plaintiff's comparative negligence is speculative and unsupported by the record.