Court Opinion

ID: 9929193
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-01 21:08:30.634572+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:05:34.227240
License: Public Domain

Ellis v Serkan Limo, Inc.
               2024 NY Slip Op 30323(U)
                     January 25, 2024
             Supreme Court, Kings County
        Docket Number: Index No. 525151/2020
                Judge: Francois A. Rivera
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                        publication.
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/26/2024 12:04 PM                                                             INDEX NO. 525151/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50                                                                                RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2024

                                                                                           At an IAS Term, Part 52 of the
                                                                                           Supreme Court of the State of
                                                                                           New York, held in and for the
                                                                                           County of Kings, at the
                                                                                           Courthouse at Civic Center,
                                                                                           Brooklyn, New York on the
                                                                                           25th day of January 2024
             HONORABLE FRANCOIS A. RIVER
             ---------------------------------------------------------------- c--------X

              WILLIAM ELLIS,                                                                DECISION & ORDER
                                                Plaintiff/Petitioner,                       Index No. 525151/2020

                                       -against-

             SERKAN LIMO, INC. and
             JOEL JEAN LOUIS,

                                                Defendants
             --------------------------------------------------------------------------X
                     Recitation in accordance with CPLR 2219(a) of the papers considered on the notice of
             motion filed on July 13, 2023, under motion sequence number two, by plaintiff William Ellis
             pursuant to CPLR §3212 for an order granting summary judgment in the plaintiff's favor on the
             issue of liability as asserted against defendants Serkan Limo, Inc. and Joel Jean Louis.

             -Notice of motion
             -Statement of material facts
             -Affirmation in support
             -Affidavit in support
                    ExhibitA-H
             -Memorandum of law in support
             -Affirmation in opposition
             -Counterstatement of material facts
             -Affirmation in reply

             BACKGROUND

                     On December 16, 2020, plaintiff commenced the instant action to recover damages for

             personal injury sustained in a motor vehicle accident by filing a summons and verified complaint

             with the Kings County Clerk's office (KCCO). On January 21, 2021, the defendants joined issue

             by interposing and filing a joint verified answer. On May 30, 2023, plaintiff filed a note of issue.

                                                              Page 1 of 4

[* 1]                                                            1 of 4
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/26/2024 12:04 PM                                                     INDEX NO. 525151/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2024

                       Plaintiff's verified complaint alleges the following salient facts. On September 5, 2020,

              at approximately 05:20 PM, plaintiff was riding a bicycle north bound on Bedford Avenue

              toward its intersection with Saint John's Place, in Brooklyn, New York. At that time, place, and

              date, defendant, Joel Jean Louis was driving a motor vehicle bearing New York license plate

              number T652784C (hereinafter the adverse vehicle) with the permission of its owner, defendant,

              Serkan Limo, Inc. Joel Jean Louis was traveling south bound on Bedford Avenue in Brooklyn,

              New York and making a left hand turn onto Saint John's Place. Joel Jean Louis struck the

              plaintiff due to his negligent operation of the adverse vehicle. The collision caused the plaintiff

              to sustain serious physical injury.

              LAW AND APPLICATION

                       It is well established that summary judgment may be granted only when it is clear that no

              triable issue of fact exists (Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital, 68 N.Y.2d 320 [1986]). The burden is

              upon the moving party to make a prima facie showing that he or she is entitled to summary

              judgment as a matter of law by presenting evidence in admissible fonn demonstrating the

              absence of material facts (Guiffirda v. Citibank, 100 N.Y.2d 72 [2003]).

                       A failure to make that showing requires the denial of the summary judgment motion,

              regardless of the adequacy ofthe opposing papers (Ayotte v. Gervasio, 81 N.Y.2d 1062 [1993]).

              If a prima facie showing has been made, the burden shifts to the opposing party to produce

              evidentiary proof sufficient to establish the existence of material issues of fact (Alvarez v.

              Prospect Hospital, supra, 68 N.Y.2d at 324).

                       Pursuant to CPLR 3212(b) a court will grant a motion for summary judgment upon a

              determination that the movant's papers justify holding, as a matter of law, that there is no defense

              to the cause of action or that the cause of action or defense has no merit. Further, all of the

                                                          Page 2 of 4

[* 2]                                                      2 of 4
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/26/2024 12:04 PM                                                    INDEX NO. 525151/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2024

              evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the opponent of the motion (Marine

              Midland Bank v. Dino & Artie s Automatic Transmission Co., 168 A.D.2d 610 [ 1990]) (People ex
                                              1

              rel. Spitzer v. Grasso, 50 AD3d 535, 544 [I st Dept 2008]).

                       Plaintiff's deposition transcript establishes the following facts. On September 5, 2020, at -

              approximately 05 :20 PM, plaintiff was riding a bicycle north bound on Bedford Avenue in

              Brooklyn, New York. At the same time defendant, Joel Jean Louis was driving a motor vehicle

              bearing New York license plate number T652784C south bound on Bedford Avenue in Brooklyn.

              Plaintiff proceeded into the intersection with a green light in his favor. Joel Jean Louis also

              proceeded into the intersection and made a left turn across opposing traffic and struck the

              plaintiff in the process. Plaintiff also submitted a certified police report. Defendant Joel Jean

              Louis advised the police that he did not see the plaintiff before the collision.

                       Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1141 requires that the driver of a vehicle intending to turn to

              the left within an intersection ... yield the right of way to any vehicle approaching from the

              opposite direction which is within the intersection or so close as to constitute an immediate

              hazard. A driver with the right-of-way is entitled to anticipate that the other driver will obey

              traffic laws that require the driver to yield (Orellana v. Mendez, 208 A.D.3d 888, 889 [2 nd Dept

              2022]). Further, a driver is negligent when an accident occurs because the driver failed to see

              that which through proper use of the driver's senses he or she should have seen (Mehta v.

              Keaveney, 216 A.D.3d 635, 635 [2 nd Dept 2023]).

                       Plaintiff's deposition testimony establishes that Joel Jean Louis violated Vehicle and

              Traffic Law§ 1141 when he made a left turn directly into the path of plaintiff's bicycle (see

              Maloney v. Niewender, 27 AD3d 426 [2nd Dept 2006)). ln opposition the defendants contend that

              the deposition transcript of the plaintiff submitted in support of the motion was unsigned

                                                          Page 3 of 4

[* 3]                                                      3 of 4
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/26/2024 12:04 PM                                                      INDEX NO. 525151/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2024

              contrary to the requirement of CPLR 3016(a) and, therefore should be disregarded. The

              argument has no merit. A party to an action, or a witness on behalf of a party to an action, does

              not need to comply with the formalities ofCPLR 3116 (a) in order to use its own deposition

              transcript in support of his own summary judgment motion, since, by submitting the transcript in

              support of his own motion, it accepts the accuracy of the transcript (Nyambuu v. Whole Foods

              Mkt. Grp., Inc., 191 A.D.3d 580, 582 [1st Dept 2021]). Defendant further argues that the

              plaintiff's testimony in the deposition transcript raises issues of the plaintiff's comparative fault

              precluding summary judgment; To be entitled t_o partial summary judgment a plaintiff does not

              bear the double burden of establishing a prima facie case of defendant's liability and the absence

              of his or her own comparative fault (Rodriguez v. City of New York, 31 N.Y.3d 312, 324-25 [2nd

              Dept 2018]). In sum, the defendants' opposition papers
                                                                  .
                                                                     do not raise a triable issue
                                                                                                : of fact.

              CONCLUSION

                     The motion by plaintiff William Ellis pursuant to CPLR §3212 for an order granting

              summary judgment on the issue of liability as asserted against Defendants Serkan Limo, Inc. and

             Joel Jean Louis is granted.

                     The foregoing constitutes the decision and order of this Court.

             ENTER:

                                                                          J.S.C.

                                                         Page 4 of 4

[* 4]                                                      4 of 4