Appellate Division, First Department · October 27, 2026 · 2026 NY Slip Op 06255
Pemberton v Liberty Ashes Inc.
Read the official decision: 2026 NY Slip Op 06255
Holding The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint because the defendants established the plaintiff ran a red light and rode against one-way traffic. The court found the plaintiff’s expert opinions regarding the defendant’s marijuana use and speeding were speculative, conclusory, and contradicted by admissible GPS and video evidence.
The court’s words
the truck, being driven by defendant Jamel D. White, had the green light and thus, the right of way before the accident
2026 NY Slip Op 06255, at the official text
plaintiff ran a red light when he rode into the intersection at the time of the accident in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law
2026 NY Slip Op 06255, at the official text
This opinion is speculative, conclusory, and unsupported by the record
2026 NY Slip Op 06255, at the official text
the truck's speed registered between three and nine miles per hour right before the accident, well below the posted speed limit
2026 NY Slip Op 06255, at the official text
without setting forth the methodology used or whether that methodology is generally accepted in the field
2026 NY Slip Op 06255, at the official text
| Court | Appellate Division, First Department |
|---|---|
| Decided | October 27, 2026 |
| Citation | 2026 NY Slip Op 06255 |
| Area of law | Personal Injury and Negligence |
| Week | Week ending October 31, 2026 |
| Official text | Official decision: 2026 NY Slip Op 06255 |
| Publication status | Slip opinions are uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
| Source feed | New York slip opinion page |
| Law Watch record id | 1530 |
Recommended citation
ESQ HQ, New York Law Watch, Pemberton v Liberty Ashes Inc., 2026 NY Slip Op 06255 (Appellate Division, First Department, October 27, 2026), https://esqhq.com/decisions/2026-ny-slip-op-06255/
How this record was made
Holding drafted by Law Watch’s in-house model, graded by three reviewers; every quotation verified word for word against the official text.
Read how Law Watch works