From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Montague v. Shun Lee Palace Rest., Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 19, 2021
198 A.D.3d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

14407 Index No. 159324/17 Case No. 2020-03862

10-19-2021

Antoinette MONTAGUE, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. SHUN LEE PALACE RESTAURANT, INC., et al., Defendants–Respondents.

Michael H. Zhu, PC, New York (Michael H. Zhu of counsel), for appellant. Gallo Vitucci Klar, LLP, New York (Jae W. Joo of counsel), for respondents.


Michael H. Zhu, PC, New York (Michael H. Zhu of counsel), for appellant.

Gallo Vitucci Klar, LLP, New York (Jae W. Joo of counsel), for respondents.

Gische, J.P., Webber, Mazzarelli, Moulton, Pitt, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank P. Nervo, J.), entered September 16, 2020, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.

Plaintiff made a prima facie showing of defendants’ negligence by submitting their employee's testimony that while making food deliveries for defendants, he collided with pedestrian plaintiff while operating his bicycle in the wrong direction on a one-way street (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1127 ; Guerrero v. Milla, 135 A.D.3d 635, 24 N.Y.S.3d 63 [1st Dept. 2016] ). In opposition, defendants failed to raise an issue of fact by offering a nonnegligent explanation for the accident (see Guerrero, 135 A.D.3d at 636, 24 N.Y.S.3d 63 ). Plaintiff was not required to demonstrate either her own freedom from comparative negligence or that defendants’ negligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident ( Simmons v. Bergh, 192 A.D.3d 547, 548, 140 N.Y.S.3d 703 [1st Dept. 2021] ). Plaintiff's detailed description of the accident provided ample evidence that defendant's negligence was a proximate cause of the accident. Any discrepancies between plaintiff's deposition testimony and her affidavit bear only on the degree, if any, of her comparative fault, and may be considered when assessing damages (see CPLR 1411 ; Simmons, 192 A.D.3d at 548, 140 N.Y.S.3d 703 ).

That defendants’ employee was acting in the scope of his employment when the accident happened is established by his testimony that he unintentionally ran into plaintiff as he was returning on his bicycle to defendants’ restaurant to hand in receipts from his food deliveries to customers (see Cianfano v. Angelina's Ristorante & Brick Oven Pizza, 161 A.D.3d 474, 73 N.Y.S.3d 421 [1st Dept. 2018] ).


Summaries of

Montague v. Shun Lee Palace Rest., Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 19, 2021
198 A.D.3d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Montague v. Shun Lee Palace Rest., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Antoinette MONTAGUE, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. SHUN LEE PALACE RESTAURANT…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 19, 2021

Citations

198 A.D.3d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
152 N.Y.S.3d 795

Citing Cases

Gama v. 2001 Story Tower A LLC

Defendants' argument that there is a risk that a different judge assigned for trial may interpret the orders…