DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is denied, and the motion is granted.
The defendants made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). However, the affirmation of the plaintiff's physician submitted in opposition to the defendants' cross motion raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury. Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting the defendants' cross motion for summary judgment.
Moreover, in this rear-end collision case, where the defendants failed to come forth with any reasonable explanation for the accident, the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on the issue of liability ( see Krakowska v. Niksa, 298 A.D.2d 561, lv denied 1 N.Y.3d 501; Reed v. New York City Tr. Auth., 299 A.D.2d 330).
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.