From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jaffe v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 10, 2002
295 A.D.2d 404 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-04551

Argued May 9, 2002.

June 10, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), dated April 9, 2001, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Silverstein Hurwitz, P.C. (Pollack, Pollack, Isaac DeCicco, New York, N.Y. [Brian J. Isaac] of counsel), for appellants.

Robert P. Tusa (Sweetbaum Sweetbaum, Lake Success, N Y [Marshall D. Sweetbaum] of counsel), for respondent Miriam B. Miller.

Gallagher Walker Bianco Plastaras, Mineola, N Y (Peter D. Lechleitner of counsel), for respondent Bruce M. Ball.

Before: SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is granted.

This action arises out of a multiple-vehicle collision. The defendant Miriam B. Miller's vehicle struck the rear of the plaintiffs' vehicle, which was stopped in traffic on the Long Island Expressway. Seconds later, the defendant Bruce M. Ball's vehicle struck the rear of the Miller vehicle, pushing it into the plaintiffs' vehicle again.

A rear-end collision with a stopped automobile creates a prima facie case of negligence with respect to the operator of the moving vehicle, imposing a duty on that operator to provide a non-negligent explanation for the collision (see Aloia v. Stoffel, 273 A.D.2d 420, 421; Dwyer v. Cohen, 262 A.D.2d 600, 601). Here, the plaintiffs made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.

The defendants failed to come forward with non-negligent explanations for the impacts. Miller could not offer any explanation as to how the accident occurred. Ball's deposition testimony that he saw the Miller vehicle collide with the plaintiffs' vehicle but he could not stop his vehicle in time to avoid a collision was insufficient to rebut the inference of negligence (see Geschwind v. Hoffman, 285 A.D.2d 448, 449; Brant v. Senatobia Operating Corp., 269 A.D.2d 483, 484).

FEUERSTEIN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, McGINITY and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Jaffe v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 10, 2002
295 A.D.2d 404 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Jaffe v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:DONALD R. JAFFE, ET AL., appellants, v. MIRIAM B. MILLER, ET AL.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 10, 2002

Citations

295 A.D.2d 404 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
743 N.Y.S.2d 294

Citing Cases

Shakir v. Falzarano

The operator of the tractor-trailer averred in an affidavit that he struck the Falzarano vehicle after it…

Marzuez-Fuentes v. Crump

Aloia v. Stoffel, 273 A.D.2d 420, 711 N.Y.S.2d 737 (2nd Dept. 2000). See also, Jaffe v. Miller, 295 A.D.2d…