Drake v. Drakoulis
This text of 304 A.D.2d 522 (Drake v. Drakoulis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Linda Chiesa appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated April 3, 2001, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims insofar as asserted against her.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A rear-end collision with a stopped vehicle creates a prima facie case of liability with respect to the operator of the moving vehicle and imposes a duty of explanation on the operator of the moving vehicle (see Maschka v Newman, 262 AD2d 615 [1999]; Niemiec v Jones, 237 AD2d 267 [1997]). However, a [523]*523driver of a motor vehicle has a duty to keep proper control of that vehicle, and to not stop suddenly or slow down without proper signaling so as to avoid a collision (Niemiec v Jones, supra, at 268). Sufficient evidence was submitted to raise triable issues of fact whether the defendant Linda Chiesa contributed to the accident by making a sudden stop and failing to give proper signals in compliance with Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1163 (see Maschka v Newman, supra). Ritter, J.P., Santucci, Feuerstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
304 A.D.2d 522, 756 N.Y.S.2d 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drake-v-drakoulis-nyappdiv-2003.