Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Carlos SANTOS, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Peleg N. BOOTH, et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Wilma Guzman, J.), entered April 28, 2014, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
“[A] rear-end collision with a stopped or stopping vehicle establishes a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the driver of the rear vehicle, and imposes a duty on the part of the operator of the moving vehicle to come forward with an adequate nonnegligent explanation for the accident” (Cabrera v. Rodriguez, 72 AD3d 553, 553 [1st Dept 2010] ). Here, plaintiff established prima facie negligence on defendant driver's part by submitting affidavits from plaintiff and his passenger stating that plaintiff's car was stopped when it was struck from behind by defendants' vehicle (see Brown v. Smalls 104 AD3d 459 [1st Dept 2013]; Johnson v. Phillips, 261 A.D.2d 269, 271 [1st Dept 1999] ). The discrepant facts between the affidavits and the police report pointed out by defendants do not warrant a different determination.
Defendants failed to come forward with an adequate nonnegligent explanation for the accident. Their contention that plaintiff stopped short is insufficient, standing alone, to rebut the presumption of negligence (see e.g. Santana v. Tic–Tak Limo Corp., 106 AD3d 572 [1st Dept 2013]; Corrigan v. Porter Cab Corp ., 101 AD3d 471, 472 [1st Dept 2012] ). To the extent defendants argue that plaintiff's violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202(a)(1)(a) established a nonnegligent explanation, or at the very least, raised a triable issue of fact as to comparative negligence, such is also unavailing. Under the circumstances presented, the sole proximate cause of the accident was defendant driver's negligence (see Malone v. Morillo, 6 AD3d 324 [1st Dept 2004] ). Contrary to defendants contention, the granting of summary judgment was not premature as both drivers have submitted affidavits and the material facts are undisputed (see Jeffrey v. DeJesus, 116 AD3d 574, 575 [1st Dept 2014] ).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 12, 2015
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)