Opinion
November 27, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the defendant's cross motion for summary judgment is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The evidence adduced by the defendant Robert Van Wart Incorporated in support of its cross motion for summary judgment established that it did not own the vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger at the time of the accident. The certificate of title indicated that the vehicle was owned by the plaintiff himself, and it was the plaintiff himself who registered the vehicle. This constitutes prima facie evidence of the plaintiff's ownership (see, e.g., Bornhurst v Massachusetts Bonding Ins. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 581; Doughty v Johnson, 155 A.D.2d 513; 8 N.Y. Jur 2d, Automobiles and Other Vehicles, § 731). The proof tendered by the plaintiff in opposition to the defendant's cross motion, including the proof tending to show that the defendant paid for the insurance coverage purchased for the vehicle, was not sufficient to establish the existence of a material issue of fact requiring trial (cf., Young v Seckler, 74 A.D.2d 155). Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.