Opinion
April 12, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.).
Ordered that the cross appeal is dismissed as abandoned; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
It is undisputed that the vehicle owned and operated by the defendant Michael Weinstein was struck from behind by a vehicle operated by the defendant Melvin Brown and owned by the defendant Baab Trucking Corporation. A rear-end collision is sufficient to create a prima facie case of liability and imposes a duty of explanation with respect to the operator of the offending vehicle. Conclusory allegations in opposition do not rebut the inference of negligence created by the unexplained rear-end collision ( see, Young v. City of New York, 113 A.D.2d 833, 834). In the case at bar, Brown's mere speculation that Weinstein may have stopped short prior to the impact is insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment ( see, Leal v. Wolff, 224 A.D.2d 392; Silberman v. Surrey Cadillac Limousine Serv., 109 A.D.2d 833; see also, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1129 [a]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted Weinstein's motion.
Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.