SNOCKER v. GEER

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs were injured when a car driven by the defendant Joseph C. Geer veered across the road into the path of their car. The defendant Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation (hereinafter Central Hudson) is the joint owner of a utility pole located near the accident site. Neither car hit the pole during the accident. Central Hudson moved for summary judgment on the ground that the pole was not a proximate cause of the accident.

The evidence presented by Central Hudson demonstrated that it was entitled to judgment in its favor as a matter of law. We agree with Special Term that the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of presenting evidentiary proof to support the theory that the accident was caused in part by the location of the pole or its light (see, GTF Mktg. v. Colonial Aluminum Sales, 66 N.Y.2d 965; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.