Diaz v Boruta
2003 NY Slip Op 51397(U)
Decided on October 21, 2003
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
Appellate Term, Second Department


[*1]
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the Official Reports.

Digest-Index Classification:
Motor Vehicles—Collision

Decided on October 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM : 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT:PESCE, P.J., ARONIN and PATTERSON, JJ.
NO. 2002-408 Q C

MARIA DIAZ, Respondent, -and- MARIA GUTIERREZ, Appellant, -

against



[*2]BRONISLAW BORUTA, Respondent.

Appeal by plaintiff Maria Gutierrez from an order of the Civil Court, Queens County (J. Golia, J.), entered on January 17, 2002, which, inter alia, denied her motion to dismiss defendant's counterclaim.


Order unanimously reversed without costs and plaintiff Gutierrez's motion for summary judgment dismissing the counterclaim granted.

In this negligence action, plaintiff Gutierrez moved for summary judgment dismissing the counterclaim interposed against her. plaintiffs testified at their examination before trial that Gutierrez was driving a vehicle in which plaintiff Diaz was a passenger when it was struck in the rear, while stopped for a red light, by defendant Boruta's vehicle. A rear-end collision with a stopped vehicle establishes a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the operator of the moving vehicle and imposes a duty on the operator of the moving vehicle to explain how the accident happened (Sekuler v Limnos Taxi, 264 AD2d 389). Inasmuch as Boruta submitted no opposition to the motion, it should have been granted.

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the issue, raised by Gutierrez upon her [*3]motion, of whether plaintiff Maria Diaz satisfied the threshold requirement of suffering a serious injury under the No-Fault Law since Gutierrez bears no liability for the accident.
Decision Date: October 21, 2003