Monette v Trummer, 22 NY3d 944 (2013)

2013 NY Slip Op 06808 [22 NY3d 944]
October 22, 2013
Court of Appeals

[*1]

Robert K. Monette et al., Appellants,
v
Christina L. Trummer et al., Defendants, and Jim Ball Pontiac-Buick-GMC, Inc., Respondent.

Decided October 22, 2013

Monette v Trummer, 105 AD3d 1328, affirmed.

{**22 NY3d at 946} OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. [*2]

On these facts, we agree with the Appellate Division majority that defendant dealer satisfied its initial burden of proving that it was not an owner of the vehicle in question under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 128. Plaintiffs failed to raise a genuine issue of fact to support a contrary finding.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.