Published on:

Workers Injured in Queens Rail Yard Accident Obtain Summary Judgment Success

In an injury case, there will be several key junctures and a number of essential hurdles you’ll have to clear in order to achieve a successful result. One of these is getting past a defense request for summary judgment because losing this motion means losing your case before you even get to trial. On the other hand, winning a motion for summary judgment that you filed means that you have succeeded in holding the other side liable without even having to go through a full trial. During this “motion practice” part of your case, make sure that you have a skilled New York truck accident attorney handling your case.

A case from Queens County arising from an accident at a rail yard is an example of such a successful result. Thomas and Christopher were sitting in a work truck when their truck was rear-ended by a boom truck that backed into them. Thomas and Christopher had intended to park near a shed that contained signal relays, but their path to their intended stopping point was blocked by another vehicle. They stopped along a narrow roadway, and that was when they were hit.

Thomas and Christopher were injured in the crash and eventually sued. Thomas and Christopher also asked the judge in their case to issue a summary judgment in their favor on the issue of the boom truck operator’s liability (and the employer’s vicarious liability). When you are asking the court to enter such a judgment in a vehicle accident case like this, there are two essential things you have to show. One is that the person who hit you was negligent. The other is that, in your conduct leading up to the accident, you were completely free of negligence on your part.

The defense’s main argument, in opposing Thomas and Christopher’s request for summary judgment, was not that the boom truck driver wasn’t negligent. Instead, the defense argued that there were still unresolved factual issues about Thomas’ contributing negligence. Specifically, the defense argued that Thomas was partly to blame as a result of his decision to stop along the narrow roadway. In order for such an argument to establish that you, as a plaintiff, were also negligent, the defense has to have reliable proof. In Thomas and Christopher’s case, the proof backing up the defense claim that Thomas was negligent for stopping along the narrow road was “mere speculation.” Any basis that is merely speculative is not good enough. That meant that the injured men in this case were entitled to the summary judgment that they sought.

If you’ve been hurt in a rear-end collision, you may have many needs and concerns. How to go about achieving a successful result and proper compensation in your legal case should not be one of them. Consult the skilled Queens truck accident attorneys at Newman, Anzalone & Newman. Our attorneys have been providing determined representation and thoughtful client attention for 40 years. To put our team to work for you, schedule a free consultation with one of our qualified attorneys. Contact us toll-free at 877-754-3099 or through our website.

More Blog Posts:

Injured New York Driver and Passenger Win Case to Hold Town Dump Truck Driver Responsible for Rear-End Accident, New York Personal Injury Lawyers Blog, Feb. 8, 2018

Achieving a Successful Result in Your New York Rear-end Auto Accident Case, New York Personal Injury Lawyers Blog, Nov. 22, 2017

Contact Information