| Francavilla v Doyno |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 04316 [96 AD3d 714] |
| June 6, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Catherine Francavilla, Appellant, v Francine Doyno et al.,Respondents. |
—[*1]
Russo, Apoznanski & Tambasco, Westbury, N.Y. (Susan J. Mitola and Sonia M. Gassan ofcounsel), for respondents.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from anorder of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), dated June 15, 2011, which denied hermotion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the plaintiff's motion forsummary judgment on the issue of liability is granted.
"A driver who fails to yield the right of way after stopping at a stop sign controlling traffic isin violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1142 (a) and is negligent as a matter of law" (Laino v Lucchese, 35 AD3d 672,672 [2006]; see Gergis v Miccio, 39AD3d 468, 468 [2007]). "A driver is required to see what is there to be seen, and a driverwho has the right of way is entitled to anticipate that the other motorist will obey the traffic lawrequiring him or her to yield" (Laino v Lucchese, 35 AD3d at 672-673 [citationsomitted]; see Gergis v Miccio, 39 AD3d at 468; Bongiovi v Hoffman, 18 AD3d 686, 687 [2005]).
Here, the plaintiff established, prima facie, her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law bydemonstrating that the defendant Francine Doyno, who was faced with a stop sign at anintersection, negligently drove her vehicle into the intersection in which the plaintiff wastraveling in her vehicle without yielding the right-of-way to the plaintiff, and that this was thesole proximate cause of the accident (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1142 [a]). Inopposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The defendants' contention thatthe plaintiff may have been negligent in the operation of her vehicle is unsupported by the recordand is based upon mere speculation (seeExime v Williams, 45 AD3d 633, 634 [2007]; Bongiovi v Hoffman, 18 AD3d at687; Williams v Econ, 221 AD2d 429, 430 [1995]). Accordingly, the plaintiff's motionfor summary judgment on the issue of liability should have been granted. Angiolillo, J.P., Eng,Lott and Austin, JJ., concur.