Kutkiewicz v Horton
2011 NY Slip Op 03215 [83 AD3d 904]
April 19, 2011
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, June 8, 2011


Ronald Kutkiewicz et al., Appellants,
v
Kevin R. Horton,Jr., Respondent.

[*1]Ronald M. Schiffman (Alexander J. Wulwick, New York, N.Y. of counsel), forappellants.

Richard T. Lau, Jericho, N.Y. (Nancy Goodman of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an orderof the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated March 26, 2010, which granted thedefendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On October 11, 2007, the injured plaintiff, Ronald Kutkiewicz (hereinafter Kutkiewicz) wasoperating his vehicle eastbound on the South Service Road of Sunrise Highway in the Town ofBrookhaven when he turned northeast to enter Sunrise Highway by an access ramp. Thedefendant, Kevin R. Horton, Jr., was operating his vehicle westbound on the South Service Road,and the two vehicles collided, allegedly causing injuries to both Kutkiewicz and Horton.Kutkiewicz and his wife, suing derivatively, commenced an action against Horton. Afterdiscovery, Horton moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. In support of hismotion, Horton submitted his own deposition testimony as well as Kutkiewicz's depositiontestimony. The Supreme Court granted Horton's motion, and the plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

When viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving parties, here the plaintiffs (seeStukas v Streiter, 83 AD3d 18 [2d Dept 2011]), the evidence Horton submitted in support ofthe motion established prima facie that the sole proximate cause of the accident was Kutkiewicz'sfailure to yield the right-of-way to Horton's vehicle (see Yelder v Walters, 64 AD3d 762, 763-764 [2009]; Vainer v DiSalvo, 79 AD3d 1023,1024 [2010]). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a triable issue of fact as towhether Horton was at fault in the happening of the accident (see Yelder v Walters, 64AD3d at 764; Vainer v DiSalvo, 79 AD3d at 1024). Consequently, the Supreme Courtproperly granted Horton's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Angiolillo,J.P., Balkin, Leventhal and Sgroi, 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.