Opinion
13725, 20948/11
12-09-2014
Jacqueline MATIAS, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Ewan W. GROSE, et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP, New York (Harry Steinberg of counsel), for appellants. Block O'Toole & Murphy, LLP, New York (David L. Scher of counsel), for respondent.
Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP, New York (Harry Steinberg of counsel), for appellants.
Block O'Toole & Murphy, LLP, New York (David L. Scher of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., RENWICK, ANDRIAS, SAXE, KAPNICK, JJ.
Opinion Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), entered April 4, 2014, which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff was driving in the left lane of a three-lane interstate highway when her car was struck by defendants' tractor trailer, which had been driving in the middle lane. Defendant driver testified that the accident occurred when a tractor trailer driving in front of him suddenly stopped, causing him to apply his brakes to try to avoid a rear-end collision. Defendants' tractor trailer jack-knifed, causing its rear portion to enter plaintiff's adjoining left lane and crush her car against the concrete divider.
In the absence of a showing of willful non-disclosure or prejudice to defendants, the court properly considered plaintiff's expert affidavit opining that defendant driver violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1129(a) by failing to maintain a safe distance from the tractor trailer in front of him (see Herman v. Moore, 106 A.D.3d 666, 967 N.Y.S.2d 25 [1st Dept.2013] ; Baulieu v. Ardsley Assoc., L.P., 85 A.D.3d 554, 555, 925 N.Y.S.2d 466 [1st Dept.2011] ; CPLR 3101[d][1] ).
In opposition to this prima facie showing that defendant driver was negligent, defendants failed to offer a non-negligent explanation for the collision (see Johnson v. Phillips, 261 A.D.2d 269, 271, 690 N.Y.S.2d 545 [1st Dept.1999] ). The emergency doctrine is inapplicable, since in requiring drivers to maintain a safe distance between their vehicles and the ones in front of them, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1129(a) imposes the duty to be aware of traffic conditions, including other vehicles suddenly stopping or slowing down (see Johnson, 261 A.D.2d at 271–272, 690 N.Y.S.2d 545 ; Williams v. Kadri, 112 A.D.3d 442, 976 N.Y.S.2d 460 [1st Dept.2013] ; Rodriguez v. Budget Rent–A–Car Sys., Inc., 44 A.D.3d 216, 224, 841 N.Y.S.2d 486 [1st Dept.2007] ).
We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.