| Monette v Trummer |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 06808 [22 NY3d 944] |
| October 22, 2013 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, January 1, 2014 |
| Robert K. Monette et al., Appellants, v Christina L. Trummer et al., Defendants, and Jim Ball Pontiac-Buick-GMC, Inc., Respondent. |
Decided October 22, 2013
Monette v Trummer, 105 AD3d 1328, affirmed.
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Dwyer, Black & Lyle, LLP, Olean (Jeffrey A. Black of counsel), for appellants.
Law Offices of Destin C. Santacrose, Buffalo (Christopher R. Turner of counsel), for respondent.
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. [*2]
On these facts, we agree with the Appellate Division majority that defendant dealer satisfied its initial burden of proving that it was not an owner of the vehicle in question under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 128. Plaintiffs failed to raise a genuine issue of fact to support a contrary finding.
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.
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, in a memorandum.