Vanni v. BartmanVanni v. Bartman
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant‘s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant failed to establish, as a matter of law, that the conduct of the plaintiff‘s decedent in crossing the street at a location other than an intersection was the sole proximate cause of the accident, and that he was free from negligence in failing to avoid a collision with the plaintiff‘s decedent (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Gecaj v DiFiglio, 303 AD2d 548, 549 [2003]; Levy v Town Bus Corp., 293 AD2d 452 [2002]; Charles v Ball, 291 AD2d 367 [2002]; Ruocco v Mulhall, 281 AD2d 406, 407 [2001];