Court Opinion

ID: 4088032
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-10-08 00:18:10.653447+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:58:42.867491
License: Public Domain

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant met her initial burden by establishing that plaintiff, a pedestrian, unexpectedly darted into the path of her vehicle (see Jellal v Brown, 37 AD3d 179 [2007]; Sheppeardv Murci, 306 AD2d 268 [2003]; Ash v McNamara,288 AD2d 956 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 612 [2002]). In opposition to the motion, however, plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact whether defendant was speeding at the time of the accident (see generally Zuckerman v City of New York,49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Contrary to defendant's contention, the deposition testimony of a non-party witness regarding defendant's speed was not so inconsistent or speculative as to render it insufficient to defeat the motion (cf.Sheppeard, 306 AD2d 268; Wolf v We Transp.,274 AD2d 514 [2000]).