FAULK v. VITAL

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant's contention, it failed to submit evidence sufficient to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851). Triable issues of fact exist as to whether the defendant driver intentionally struck the injured plaintiff and whether he was a permissive operator of the vehicle ( see generally Purdie v. Ingram, 18 AD2d 667; cf. Beddingfield v. LaBarbera, 276 AD2d 575; Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. v. Arzillo, 98 AD2d 495).