Messana v Rallo
2008 NY Slip Op 01309 [48 AD3d 523]
February 13, 2008
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, April 16, 2008


Angelina Messana et al., Appellants,
v
Salvatore A. Rallo, Respondent.

[*1] Composto & Composto, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Frank A. Composto and Eric C. Bryant of counsel), for appellants.

Martyn, Toher & Martyn, Mineola, N.Y. (Christine J. Hill of counsel), for respondent. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Nelson, J.), entered March 19, 2007, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

In response to the defendant's showing of his entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the plaintiffs raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant was negligent and, if so, whether his actions were a proximate cause of the accident (see Exime v Williams, 45 AD3d 633 [2007]; Croce v Budget Rent-A-Car Corp., 7 AD3d 748 [2004]; Siegel v Sweeney, 266 AD2d 200, 202 [1999]). Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment should have been denied (see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Mastro, J.P., Skelos, Florio and Dickerson, JJ., concur.