In Feldberg v. Skorupa, plaintiff alleged that he was riding his bike down the street when defendant’s car backed out of a driveway, struck him, and fled the scene. Later that evening, plaintiff returned to the scene and, spotting a vehicle he believed to have been the one that hit him, wrote down the license plate number, and filed suit. Defendant later moved for summary judgment on the grounds that it was impossible for plaintiff to prove that it was his vehicle that hit him. The Supreme Court denied defendant’s motion and the Second Department affirmed, holding that defendant failed to meet its prima facie burden by simply pointing out gaps in plaintiff’s case and because “he offered no evidence to affirmatively demonstrate that his vehicle was not the vehicle that struck the plaintiff”.
We have many cases were a police report was made after the fact, and there is no identifying information for the adverse vehicle listed, yet, somehow, the plaintiff is able to identify our bus or van later in time to file an action. In moving to dismiss these cases, we must provide detailed information or other documentary evidence that clearly demonstrates we were not involved.
Each of the firm's offices include partners, associates and a professional staff dedicated to meeting the challenge of providing the firm's clients with extraordinary service.
