Adams v Lemberg Enters., Inc.
2007 NY Slip Op 07644 [44 AD3d 694]
October 9, 2007
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 12, 2007


Ronnie Adams et al., Appellants,
v
Lemberg Enterprises,Inc., et al., Defendants, and Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc., et al.,Respondents.

[*1]Joseph A. Deliso, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellants.

MacCartney, MacCartney, Kerrigan & MacCartney, Nyack, N.Y. (Christopher J. Walsh ofcounsel), for respondents Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc., and Mohamed Raphique.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited bytheir brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), datedJune 21, 2006, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Pacific PetroleumTransport, Inc., and Mohamed Raphique which was for summary judgment dismissing thecomplaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and thatbranch of the motion of the defendants Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc. and MohamedRaphique which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted againstthem is denied.

The injured plaintiff allegedly was standing behind a double-parked truck, which was ownedby the defendant Pacific Petroleum Transport, Inc., and operated by the defendant MohamedRaphique, when a vehicle operated by the defendant Cornelius Daisy pinned him against thedouble-parked truck.

It is well settled that evidence of negligence is not enough by itself to establish liability. Itmust also be proved that the negligence was a proximate cause of the injury-producing [*2]event (see Sheehan v City of New York, 40 NY2d 496, 501[1976]; Peters v City of New York,33 AD3d 779 [2006]). Generally, issues of proximate cause are for the fact finder toresolve (see Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308 [1980]). Here, the defendantsPacific Petroleum Transport, Inc. and Mohamed Raphique failed to submit evidence sufficient todemonstrate their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Winegrad v New YorkUniv. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]). The issue of whether Raphique's negligence indouble parking his truck was a proximate cause of the accident should be submitted to the jury(see Ferrer v Harris, 55 NY2d 285 [1982]; Giordano v Sheridan Maintenance Corp.,38 AD2d 552 [1971]). Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Florio and Dillon, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.