From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PION v. JIE JANG

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 25, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 51267 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)

Opinion

2003-1657 KC.

Decided October 25, 2004.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (M. Solomon, J), entered on August 20, 2003, which granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment.

Order unanimously reversed without costs and plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment denied.

PRESENT: ARONIN, J.P., PATTERSON and GOLIA, JJ.


A rear-end collision with a stopped or stopping vehicle establishes a prima facie case of negligence with respect to the operator of the moving vehicle and imposes a duty of explanation on the operator of the moving vehicle ( see Flood v. New York City Tr. Authority, 6 AD3d 655; Chepel v. Meyers, 306 AD2d 235; Purcell v. Axelsen, 286 AD2d 379; Colonna v. Suarez, 278 AD2d 355; Maschka v. Newman, 262 AD2d 615). It is uncontroverted on the record that the lead vehicle operated by plaintiff Jessica Pion was stopped or stopping at the time it was rear-ended by defendant's vehicle. However, the testimony of the parties at the examinations before trial was sufficient to raise triable issues of fact regarding the circumstances surrounding the accident, including whether the driver of the lead vehicle contributed to the accident by making a sudden stop ( see Chepel v. Meyers, 306 AD2d 235, supra; Drake v. Drakoulis, 304 AD2d 522; Purcell v. Axelsen 286 AD2d 379, supra; Maschka v. Newman, 262 AD2d 615, supra).


Summaries of

PION v. JIE JANG

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 25, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 51267 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)
Case details for

PION v. JIE JANG

Case Details

Full title:JESSICA PION and JANICE PION, Respondents, v. JIE JANG, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 25, 2004

Citations

2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 51267 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)