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; Gecaj v. DiFiglio, 303 AD2d 548, 549; Levy v. Town Bus Corp., 293 AD2d 452; Charles v. Ball, 291 AD2d 367; Ruocco v. Mulhall, 281 AD2d 406, 407; Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146, 1152 [a]). Since the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof, we need not address the sufficiency of the plaintiffs' papers in opposition ( see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853).