Opinion
2018–11300 Index No. 617973/17
12-18-2019
Jennifer A. CLEMENTS, Appellant, v. Timothy G. GIATAS, et al., Respondents.
Scott Lockwood, Deer Park, NY, for appellant. Dodge & Monroy, P.C., Lake Success, N.Y. (Mark T. Scopinich of counsel), for respondents.
Scott Lockwood, Deer Park, NY, for appellant.
Dodge & Monroy, P.C., Lake Success, N.Y. (Mark T. Scopinich of counsel), for respondents.
ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., REINALDO E. RIVERA, SHERI S. ROMAN, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (David T. Reilly, J.), dated September 5, 2018. The order denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
On November 6, 2014, a vehicle operated by the plaintiff was struck in the rear by a vehicle operated by the defendant Erica A. Giatas (hereinafter the defendant driver) and owned by the defendant Timothy G. Giatas. The plaintiff subsequently commenced this personal injury action against the defendants. Before depositions were conducted, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The Supreme Court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appeals.
A rear-end collision with a stopped or stopping vehicle establishes a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the operator of the rear vehicle, thereby requiring that operator to rebut the inference of negligence by providing a nonnegligent explanation for the collision (see Tutrani v. County of Suffolk , 10 N.Y.3d 906, 908, 861 N.Y.S.2d 610, 891 N.E.2d 726 ; Grant v. Carrasco , 165 A.D.3d 631, 631–632, 84 N.Y.S.3d 235 ; Lopez v. Dobbins , 164 A.D.3d 776, 777, 79 N.Y.S.3d 566 ). "A nonnegligent explanation may include evidence of a mechanical failure, a sudden stop of the vehicle ahead, an unavoidable skidding on wet pavement, or any other reasonable cause" ( Ortiz v. Hub Truck Rental Corp. , 82 A.D.3d 725, 726, 918 N.Y.S.2d 156 ; see Orcel v. Haber , 140 A.D.3d 937, 33 N.Y.S.3d 429 ).
Here, in support of her motion, the plaintiff submitted an affidavit that established, prima facie, that the defendant driver was negligent when she struck the rear of the plaintiff's stopped vehicle (see Yong Dong Liu v. Lowe , 173 A.D.3d 946, 947, 102 N.Y.S.3d 713 ; Motta v. Gomez , 161 A.D.3d 725, 726, 72 N.Y.S.3d 840 ). However, in opposition, the defendants raised a triable issue of fact as to the existence of a nonnegligent explanation for the collision (see Miller v. Steinberg , 164 A.D.3d 492, 493, 82 N.Y.S.3d 597 ; Rivera v. Gardillo , 113 A.D.3d 667, 978 N.Y.S.2d 689 ; DeLouise v. S.K.I. Wholesale Beer Corp. , 75 A.D.3d 489, 491, 904 N.Y.S.2d 761 ). Accordingly, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination denying the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
SCHEINKMAN, P.J., RIVERA, ROMAN and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.