 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Melendez v. Budget Rent-A-Car2/8/2005
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the printed Official Reports.
Plaintiff Jillian Melendez commenced this action seeking to recover money damages for personal injuries sustained during an automobile accident. Defendant Wilda Ramos now moves for a court order amending her answer to include the affirmative defense of collateral estoppel, deeming said answer served, and granting summary judgment based upon the newly-added affirmative defense of collateral estoppel. The dispositive issue on this motion is whether collateral estoppel applies to a Judicial Hearing Officer's ("JHO") decision at a framed issue hearing denying a petition seeking to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim based upon the fact that the offending vehicle belonged to an unidentified hit-and-run driver.
Factual and Procedural Background
This dispute arises from an automobile accident that took place on April 7, 2001. Reportedly, plaintiff Julia Melendez was injured while riding as a passenger in a motor vehicle driven by defendant Joy Walton, who had rented it from defendant Budget Rent-A-Car. Such vehicle was struck by a vehicle which left the scene of the accident. The plate of the vehicle that left the scene was later identified as the one belonging to defendant Ramos. In her answer, however, defendant Ramos denied that either her car or she had been involved in the accident that resulted in plaintiff's injuries.
In addition to the damages sought in this personal injury action commenced in early 2004, plaintiff Melendez sought arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim against its own insurer, Allstate Insurance, based upon defendant Ramos' denial of being the hit-and-run driver. Pursuant to regulation 35D, an uninsured motor vehicle is defined, inter alia, as one for which neither the owner nor driver can be identified, including a hit-and-run vehicle. Allstate Insurance, however, sought to permanently stay the uninsured motorist claim, by instituting a special proceeding pursuant to Article 75 of the CPLR, in Supreme Court, Kings County, on the ground that the offending hit-and-run driver had been identified as defendant Ramos, whose car was insured by State Farm Insurance. Both defendant Ramos and State Farm Insurance were named as respondents in the Article 75 Special Proceeding.
The Supreme Court, Kings County, granted a temporary stay of the arbitration of the uninsured motorist claim, pending the outcome of the court-ordered framed issue hearing. At the hearing, presided over by JHO Leonard Silverman, defendant Ramos testified that neither her car nor she had been involved in the automobile accident that resulted in plaintiff's injuries. She explained that her license plate had been stolen prior to the accident in question. Explicitly crediting Ramos' averment that her license plate had been stolen and that neither her car nor she had been involved in the accident, the JHO denied a permanent stay of the arbitration of the uninsured motorist claim and dismissed the Article 75 petition.
Defendant Ramos now moves for a court order granting her leave to amend her answer to assert the affirmative defense of collateral estoppel based upon the JHO's decision at the framed issue hearing finding that she had not been the offending hit-and-run driver. Concomitantly, defendant Ramos moves for summary judgment on the newly-added affirmative defense, arguing that the JHO's decision collaterally estopps plaintiff from re-litigating in the personal injury action the issue of defendant's non-involvement in the automobile
Page 1 2 3 4 New York Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|