MORA v. GARCIA

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiff allegedly was injured while he was a passenger in a motor vehicle operated by the defendant Shirley A. Garcia, which was involved in a collision with a motor vehicle operated by the defendant Ray A. Mojica and owned by the defendant Spectacular Limo Service. Mojica and Spectacular Limo Service demonstrated their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by establishing that Garcia violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1160(c) when she attempted to make a left turn from the center lane of a roadway and crossed directly into the path of Mojica who was proceeding legally in the leftmost lane of traffic ( see Rieman v. Smith, 302 A.D.2d 510; Sureda v. Diamonti, 300 A.D.2d 572 . In opposition to the motion, the conclusory and speculative assertions of the plaintiff concerning Mojica's speed and possible negligence were unsupported by any competent evidence and, therefore, did not raise a triable issue of fact ( see Rieman v. Smith, supra; Russo v. Scibetti, 298 A.D.2d 514). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against Mojica and Spectacular Limo Service ( see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320).

FLORIO, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.