| Hamilton v King Tung Kong |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 02284 [93 AD3d 821] |
| March 27, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Christopher Hamilton, Respondent, v King Tung Kong,Appellant. |
—[*1] Robinson & Yablon, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Thomas Torto and Jason Levine of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Queens County (Pineda-Kirwan, J.), dated September 7, 2011, which grantedthe plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff pedestrian was crossing a street when he was struck by a vehicle owned andoperated by the defendant. The plaintiff established, prima facie, his entitlement to judgment as amatter of law on the issue of liability by presenting proof that he was walking within a crosswalkand that he looked for approaching traffic before he began to cross (see Rosenblatt v Venizelos, 49 AD3d519, 520 [2008]; see also Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1151 [a]; 34 RCNY 4-04[b]). Contrary to the defendant's contention, his unsupported speculation that the injured plaintiffwas comparatively negligent was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to themotion (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]; Sulaiman v Thomas, 54 AD3d751, 752 [2008]; see also Platt vWolman, 29 AD3d 663 [2006]; Klein v Byalik, 1 AD3d 399, 400 [2003]). Since the defendantfailed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie showing, theSupreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue ofliability. Balkin, J.P., Belen, Hall and Miller, JJ., concur.