Plaintiff Gave an Adequate Version of How this Accident Happened -- Not Speculation -- to Defeat Defense Summary Judgment

Case: Giraldo v. Twins Ambulette Service, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York

Date: June 20, 2012

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn and Queens; Queens injury lawyer)

**************************************************

RELATED POSTS:

PLAINTIFF DOESN'T KNOW WHY SHE FELL; SIDEWALK ACCIDENT CASE AGAINST NEW YORK CITY DISMISSED

SLIP-AND-FALL ACCIDENT VICTIM CAN'T SUE FOR ALLEGED OIL LEAK FROM CAR; DEFENSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED, CASE DISMISSED

ACCIDENT VICTIM WHO CAN'T SAY WHY OR WHERE SHE FELL LOSES TO DEFENSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

CONSTRUCTION WORKER'S INJURY CLAIM THAT CO-WORKER SLIPPED ON WET RAMP AND LOST GRIP ON DOOR FRAME THEY WERE CARRYING DISMISSED

**************************************************

Facts: This is an odd-sounding accident. The accident victim was a home care attendant traveling with her patient on an ambulette. Something happened on the rear loading ramp of the vehicle.

The defense has made a motion to the court for summary judgment dismissing the case, arguing that since plaintiff can't say why she fell, she must lose. In other words, the defense argues that the plaintiff is speculating, and that there is no basis to hold it responsible for the accident and injuries suffered by this home car attendant.

The Court finds that the plaintiff testified at her deposition that the driver of the ambulette touched her arm when she was on the ramp and caused her to fall.

The ambulette driver denied touching the accident victim. The court finds that this only raises an issue of fact.

Held: Summary judgment as requested by the defense is denied. This case goes forward to trial.

Categories