KASTRITSIOS v. MARCELLO

2010-07083.

84 A.D.3d 1174 (2011)

923 N.Y.S.2d 863

ROSARIA A. KASTRITSIOS et al., Appellants, v. GIOVANNI MARCELLO et al., Respondents.

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

Decided May 24, 2011.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability is granted.

This action arises out of a two-vehicle collision involving a vehicle operated by the plaintiff Rosaria A. Kastritsios which was struck in the rear by the vehicle operated by the defendant Angela Marcello and owned by the defendant Giovanni Marcello.

As a general rule, "a rear-end collision 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 explanataion for the collision" (Plummer v Nourddine, 82 A.D.3d 1069, 1069-1070 [2011]; see Ballatore v Hub Truck Rental Corp., 83 A.D.3d 978 [2011]; Ortiz v Hub Truck Rental Corp., 82 A.D.3d 725, 726 [2011]).

Here, the plaintiff driver submitted an affidavit in which she stated that her vehicle was stopped at a red light at an intersection when her vehicle was struck in the rear by the defendants' vehicle. This established the plaintiffs' prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability.

In response, the affidavit of the defendant driver was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562 [1980]; Campbell v City of Yonkers, 37 A.D.3d 750, 751 [2007]). The claim that the lead vehicle made a sudden stop, standing alone, is insufficient to rebut the presumption of negligence on the part of the following vehicle (see Franco v Breceus, 70 A.D.3d 767 [2010]; Mallen v Su, 67 A.D.3d 974, 975 [2009]; Ramirez v Konstanzer, 61 A.D.3d 837 [2009]; Jumandeo v Franks, 56 A.D.3d 614 [2008]; Arias v Rosario, 52 A.D.3d 551, 552-553 [2008]; Lundy v Llatin, 51 A.D.3d 877 [2008]; Johnston v Spoto, 47 A.D.3d 888, 889 [2008]; Campbell v City of Yonkers, 37 AD3d at 751; Neidereger v Misuraca, 27 A.D.3d 537 [2006]; Russ v Investech Sec., 6 A.D.3d 602, 602 [2004]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in denying the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases