Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog
In motor vehicle accident cases, establishing which driver had the right-of-way is often key to determining liability. Under New York law, a driver who proceeds through an intersection with a green light is generally entitled to assume that other motorists will obey traffic signals. A recent New York decision in which the court ruled in favor of a plaintiff who had the right-of-way and rejected the defendants’ attempt to assign partial fault to her illustrates how courts apply this principle to resolve questions of comparative negligence. If you or someone you love were injured in a car crash, you should speak with a skilled Syracuse personal injury attorney about your rights.
History of the Case
It is reported that the plaintiff driver and her husband brought a personal injury lawsuit against the defendants following a car accident in Brooklyn. The incident occurred in May 2021 when a vehicle operated by the defendant struck the plaintiff’s car as she traveled through an intersection. The plaintiffs claimed the defendant driver failed to yield and entered the intersection against a red light.
It is alleged that the plaintiff was proceeding lawfully through the intersection with a green traffic signal when the collision occurred. The plaintiffs sought damages for physical injuries and loss of consortium. In response, the defendants raised the affirmative defense of comparative negligence, arguing that the plaintiff driver bore some responsibility for the crash.
It is further reported that the plaintiffs moved for summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the comparative negligence defense on the ground that the plaintiff driver was not at fault. The trial court denied the motion. The plaintiffs appealed the denial.
Comparative Negligence in Car Accident Cases
On appeal, the court reversed the lower court’s ruling and granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on the issue of comparative negligence. The court emphasized that under New York law, a driver who proceeds into an intersection through a red light is negligent as a matter of law. The record demonstrated that the plaintiff driver had a green light and the right-of-way at the time of the collision.
The court further explained that a driver with the right-of-way is not required to anticipate that another motorist will disobey traffic laws. When a driver has only moments to react to a sudden hazard caused by another’s unlawful conduct, courts typically do not assign fault to the reacting driver. Accordingly, the plaintiff was not comparatively negligent for failing to avoid the crash under the circumstances presented.
In support of their defense, the court found that the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. They offered no evidence that the plaintiff driver was inattentive, speeding, or otherwise contributed to the accident. As a result, the court concluded that the plaintiff driver’s conduct did not contribute to the cause of the collision and dismissed the defendants’ affirmative defense of comparative negligence.
Speak with an Experienced Syracuse Personal Injury Attorney
Motor vehicle accident claims can quickly become complex, especially when defendants attempt to shift blame onto injured parties. If you were injured in a car accident and believe the other driver was at fault, the knowledgeable Syracuse personal injury attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can help you build a strong case. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to schedule a consultation and learn more about your options for recovery.