Opinion
2001-09035
Argued April 30, 2002.
September 10, 2002.
In four related actions, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death, Dominick Lestingi, as Administrator of the Estate of Michael Lestingi, the plaintiff in Action No. 1, appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated September 6, 2001, as denied his cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability against the defendant Eugene N. Holland in Action No. 1, and, in effect, upon searching the record, granted summary judgment to Eugene N. Holland dismissing the complaint in Action No. 1, and ELRAC, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car, and Dominick Lestingi, as Administrator of the Goods, Chattels and Credits of Michael Lestingi, defendants in Action No. 3, separately appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of the same order as granted the motion of Kevser Ermendi, the plaintiff in Action No. 3, for summary judgment on the issue of liability against them, and granted that branch of the cross motion of Eugene N. Holland, the defendant in Action No. 3, which was to dismiss their cross claims asserted against him.
Panken, Besterman, Winer, Becker Sherman LLP, New York, N.Y. (Kenneth B. Becker of counsel), for appellant in Action No. 1.
Chesney Murphy, LLP (Michelle S. Russo, P.C., Rockville Centre, N.Y., of counsel), for appellants in Action No. 3.
Composto Fitzgerald, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Thomas J. Fitzgerald of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent in Action No. 3.
McCabe, Collins, McGeough Fowler, LLP, Mineola, N.Y. (Patrick M. Murphy of counsel), for Eugene N. Holland, respondent in Action No. 1 and defendant-respondent in Action No. 3.
Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., NANCY E. SMITH, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to Eugene N. Holland and Kevser Ermendi, payable by Dominick Lestingi, ELRAC, Inc., and Enterprise Rent-A-Car.
The instant actions arise out of a two-vehicle collision which occurred at the intersection of Rodney Street and Borinquen Street in Brooklyn. While traveling north on Rodney Street, the decedent Michael Lestingi drove his vehicle through a red traffic light and collided with a vehicle operated by Eugene N. Holland, who was driving west on Borinquen Street. Holland had a green traffic light in his favor when he entered the intersection. Michael Lestingi died as a result of injuries he allegedly sustained in the collision. The passenger in his vehicle, Kevser Ermendi, the plaintiff in Action No. 3, allegedly sustained personal injuries in the collision. Michael Lestingi's estate brought Action No. 1 against Holland, and Ermendi brought Action No. 3 against ELRAC, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Lestingi's estate, and Holland. The Supreme Court, inter alia, in effect, upon searching the record, granted Holland summary judgment dismissing the complaint in Action No. 1, and granted that branch of Holland's cross motion which was to dismiss the cross claims in Action No. 3 insofar as asserted against him.
The Supreme Court correctly granted Holland summary judgment dismissing the complaint in Action No. 1, and correctly granted that branch of his cross motion which was to dismiss the cross claims asserted against him in Action No. 3. Holland established that Michael Lestingi's negligence was the sole proximate cause of the collision, as his vehicle proceeded through the intersection against a red traffic light, without stopping (see Casanova v. New York City Tr. Auth., 279 A.D.2d 495; Puccio v. Caputo, 272 A.D.2d 387; Hines v. New York City Tr. Auth., 264 A.D.2d 506, 507; Wolfson v. Milillo, 262 A.D.2d 636, 637). Neither the plaintiff in Action No. 1 nor the defendants in Action No. 3 raised a triable issue of fact as to whether Holland was at fault in the happening of the accident or whether he could have done anything to avoid the collision (see Casanova v. New York City Tr. Auth., supra; Puccio v. Caputo, supra; Packer v. Mirasola, 256 A.D.2d 394).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
PRUDENTI, P.J., SMITH, FRIEDMANN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.