Legal Opinion
Ratut v. Singh
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided October 17, 2000PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Martin M. Solomon, J.
The plaintiff moves for summary judgment on the issue of li*351ability. The moving papers show that plaintiff was stopped at a traffic light when his vehicle was hit in the rear by defendant’s vehicle.
“The operator of the moving vehicle is required to rebut the inference of negligence created by an unexplained rear-end collision, because he is in the best position to explain whether the collision was due to a reasonable, nonnegligent cause. If the operator of the moving vehicle cannot come forward with any evidence to rebut the inference of negligence, the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Phillips v. Joseph Kantor & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Indig v. FinkelsteinNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Egleston v. KalamaridesNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Landisi v. Beacon Community Development AgencyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Complete Orthopedic Supplies, Inc. v. State Farm InsuranceCivil Court of the City of New York · 2007
- CPT Medical Service, P.C. v. Utica Mutual InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 2006
- Executive Nurses Home Care, Inc. v. DeMarcoNassau County District Court · 2003