Vehicle and Traffic
Decisions on crashes involving cars, trucks, buses, bicycles, and pedestrians.
-
Crash With a Driver Allegedly Working for Uber: Claims Against Uber Go Forward Because the Uber Companies Did Not Prove He Was an Independent Contractor (Rivera v M. GS Talukder, 2d Dept 2026)
A company can be held responsible for a crash caused by its employee on the job, but generally not for one caused by an independent contractor, and which one a driver was is usually a question for the jury. Here, the Second Department reversed the dismissal of an injured woman’s claims against three Uber companies, holding that they failed to eliminate all questions of fact about whether the driver was working as an independent contractor, rather than as their employee, when the collision happened.
-
Intersection Crash Gets a New Trial: A Driver With the Right of Way Must Still Use Reasonable Care, and Photos of the Vehicle Damage Should Have Been Admitted (Pruessen v Richard Capobianco, Inc., 2d Dept 2026)
A driver with the right of way may assume that others will yield, but still must use reasonable care to avoid hitting a vehicle that is already in the intersection. Here, the Second Department reinstated a driver’s case that had been dismissed at the close of her evidence at trial, and held that photographs of the damage to both vehicles should have been admitted at the trial on fault.
-
Rear-End Crash Goes to Trial: Other Driver Swore the Car Ahead Stopped Suddenly “for No Apparent Reason” (Ruiz v Town of Southampton, 2d Dept 2026)
In New York, a driver who rear-ends a stopped or stopping vehicle is presumed negligent and must give a non-negligent explanation for the crash. Here, the Second Department affirmed the denial of an injured driver’s motion for summary judgment on fault, because the other driver’s sworn statement that the plaintiff made “a sudden stop for no apparent reason” conflicted with the plaintiff’s account.
-
Underinsured Motorist (SUM) Coverage Did Not Apply Because the Other Vehicle’s Policies, Including an Umbrella, Exceeded the Injured Driver’s Own Liability Limits (Matter of Erie Ins. Co. v Rodriguez, 2d Dept 2026)
Supplementary underinsured motorist (SUM) coverage on your own auto policy applies only when the bodily injury liability coverage on the vehicle that caused the crash is less than the liability limits of your own policy, and the law counts all of that vehicle’s bodily injury policies. Here, the Second Department affirmed an order permanently stopping a driver’s SUM arbitration, because the other vehicle’s primary and umbrella policies together had higher limits than the $1,000,000 liability limit on his own policy.
-
Left Turn Around a Truck Blocking the Intersection: Turning Driver’s Claim Reinstated (Sanchez-Rodriguez v Bruce, 1st Dept 2026)
A driver turning left must generally yield to oncoming traffic, but a driver with a green light must also yield to other traffic lawfully within the intersection, so a left turn does not automatically mean the turning driver was at fault. Here, the First Department reinstated a left-turning driver’s claim because the record did not conclusively show which driver had to yield after a concrete truck blocked the intersection.
-
Car Crash Injury Claims Go Forward: A Biomechanical Engineer’s Report Could Not Replace a Medical Opinion (Bonilla-Acosta v Max Servs. Corp., 2d Dept 2026)
In a New York car accident case, a defendant that asks the court to dismiss an injury claim because there was no “serious injury” must first make that showing with competent medical evidence. Here, the Second Department affirmed the denial of two defendants’ motion, holding that their biomechanical engineer could speak to the forces in the crash but did not show he was qualified to give a medical opinion on whether the accident caused the injuries.
-
Rear-End Crash: Passengers Win on Fault Before Depositions Despite the Truck Driver’s Later Affidavit (Escobar v Sanchez, 2d Dept 2026)
When a vehicle that is stopped or slowing is hit from behind, the rear driver is presumed negligent and must give a non-negligent explanation for the crash. Here, the Second Department affirmed summary judgment on fault for two passengers in a car struck in the rear by a tractor-trailer, holding that the truck driver’s affidavit, which contradicted his statements recorded in the police accident report, raised only a “feigned issue of fact,” and that the motions were not premature.
-
Bus Video Defeats a Passenger’s Claim Against NYC Transit Despite the Other Driver’s Sworn Account (Hyejun Cho v NYCTA, 2d Dept 2026)
When clear video shows how a crash happened, a court may decide fault without a trial, even if a driver swears to a different version. Here, the Second Department affirmed the dismissal of a car passenger’s claims against the New York City Transit Authority and its bus driver, because the bus video conclusively established that the driver of the car she was riding in was the sole proximate cause of the crash.
-
Late Notice of Claim Denied: Another Police Department’s Accident Report Did Not Give the Village Notice (Matter of Defonce v Village of Port Chester, 2d Dept 2026)
When a Notice of Claim deadline is missed, a court considers whether the public body learned the essential facts in time, whether there is a reasonable excuse, and whether the delay hurt its defense. Here, the Second Department affirmed the denial of an injured police officer’s request to serve a late Notice of Claim, holding that an accident report prepared by a different police department did not give the Village of Port Chester actual knowledge of his claim.
-
Car Crash Claims Against Two Defendants Dismissed Where the Treating Doctor First Saw the Patient Three Months Later (Gomez v Uber Tech., Inc., 1st Dept 2026)
In a New York car accident case, an injured person who claims a “serious injury” needs admissible medical proof linking the injuries to the accident, and that proof must answer any defense claim that the injuries are old, degenerative conditions. Here, the First Department affirmed the dismissal of the claims against two of the defendants because the early treatment records were unsworn and uncertified, and the treating doctor first examined the plaintiff three months after the collision, so he had not seen the injuries when they were new.
-
E-Bike Rider’s Claim Against NYC Transit: An Early Summary Judgment Motion Was Not Premature, but Unclear Video Was Not Enough (Komlan v Belisle, 1st Dept 2026)
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.
-
Late Notice of Claim Allowed Against NYC Transit Because a Passenger’s Timely Notice Covered the Same Crash (Matter of Tkebuchava v NYCTA, 2d Dept 2026)
A missed 90-day deadline does not always end a case. Here, the driver of a car hit by a New York City Transit Authority bus missed the deadline, but a passenger on the bus had served her own timely Notice of Claim, which gave the authority actual knowledge of the essential facts, and the authority made no showing that the delay hurt its defense.
Decision Day summarizes and comments on published court decisions. 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 an entry says otherwise, The Eskesen Law Firm did not represent any party in these cases.
Legal Help When You Need It
Fill out the form to request a consultation and we will be in touch as soon as possible.
(212) 433-4500Toll-free 1-800-321-NYLAW (1-800-321-6952)
- Calls answered live 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
- We speak English, Spanish and Portuguese.
- Main office
450 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1808
New York, NY 10123 - Downtown office
30 Wall Street, Suite 804
New York, NY 10005
By appointment only