DeJesus v Alba
2010 NY Slip Op 03803 [14 NY3d 860]
May 6, 2010
Court of Appeals
As corrected through Wednesday, June 23, 2010


[*1]
Diomara DeJesus, an Infant, by Her Father and Natural Guardian, Francisco DeJesus, Appellant,
v
Jose J. Alba et al., Respondents.

Decided May 6, 2010

DeJesus v Alba, 63 AD3d 460, affirmed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Seligson, Rothman & Rothman, New York City (Martin S. Rothman of counsel), for appellant.

Picciano & Scahill, P.C., Westbury (Gilbert J. Hardy of counsel), for respondents.

{**14 NY3d at 861} OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question not answered upon the ground that it is unnecessary. The Appellate Division properly concluded that no triable issues of fact existed whether defendant driver acted prudently under the circumstances.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones.


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.