This page summarizes and comments on a published court decision. It is general information, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case depends on its own facts. Unless this page says otherwise, The Eskesen Law Firm did not represent any party in this case.
Bottom line
The fact that depositions have not occurred in a motor vehicle accident case does not necessarily preclude the court from granting summary judgment, but the proof must still show the defendants’ negligence clearly. Here, the First Department held that an e-bike rider’s motion against the New York City Transit Authority was not premature, but because the surveillance video did not clearly depict the accident, it affirmed the trial court’s denial of the motion.
The case
- Court
- Appellate Division, First Department
- Decided
- October 6, 2026
- Case
- Komlan v Belisle
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 05729
- Official text
- Read the decision on the New York courts’ official reporter site
The facts
The plaintiff alleged that while he was riding his electric bike, a bus owned and operated by the defendants swerved into his lane and knocked him off his bike. The defendants included the New York City Transit Authority. Before depositions were held, he moved for summary judgment on liability and to dismiss the defendants’ comparative negligence defense, and he submitted a surveillance video. The Supreme Court, New York County, denied the motion, and he appealed.
The holding
The First Department unanimously affirmed. On timing, it held: “Plaintiff’s motion was not premature because information as to how the accident occurred is within defendants’ own knowledge” (2026 NY Slip Op 05729, *1). On the proof, quoting its earlier decision in Miranda-Lopez v New York City Tr. Auth., it held: “[T]he accident is not clearly depicted, and the video does not, as [plaintiff] argues, irrefutably demonstrate” the defendants’ negligence (id.). Because the plaintiff did not make a prima facie showing, his motion “was properly denied without regard to the sufficiency of defendants’ papers in opposition” (id.).
What changed
Nothing new: this applies settled law, including the court’s earlier decisions on prematurity (Baxter v Gosh) and video evidence (Miranda-Lopez).
What it means
- A summary judgment motion asks the court to decide an issue, here who was at fault, on the papers, without a trial.
- A motion made before depositions is not automatically too early. The lack of depositions, “without more,” is not enough to deny it, especially when the defendants already know how the accident happened.
- The person who moves must prove the point on paper first. If that proof falls short, the motion fails, however weak the other side’s response.
- Video can be enough, but only if it clearly shows what happened. Here, the court found that the accident was not clearly depicted.
- Losing this motion does not end the case. Fault was simply not decided on the papers.
Our view
Commentary by Frank N. Eskesen. This section is opinion.
We note that the court agreed with the rider on timing: he did not have to wait for depositions before asking the court to decide fault. That part may help expedite resolution of cases when how an accident happens is within the defendants’ own knowledge. This motion failed on the proof. In our experience, video can be the strongest evidence in a traffic case, but only when it shows the moment of impact clearly. We believe a motion built on video alone should show still images of the key moments, so the court can clearly appreciate exactly what the footage shows. Fault matters even more in newer motor vehicle cases: for actions commenced on or after May 26, 2026, that fall under the new law, a plaintiff found more at fault than the defendants cannot recover (see our post on New York’s 2026 changes). A video is only as good as what it clearly shows.
Topics
Court: First Department. Year: 2026. Result: affirmed.
Reviewed by Frank N. Eskesen, admitted in New York since 2000. Decided October 6, 2026. Posted October 6, 2026.
Questions about your own accident?
Call us for a free consultation. Calls answered live 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.