Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The appellant failed to demonstrate her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see, Sanford v. Stillitano, 241 A.D.2d 489). There was conflicting evidence as to how the instant three-vehicle, rear-end, chain-reaction collision occurred, including evidence suggesting that there were multiple impacts. Accordingly, the court correctly denied the appellant's motion ( see, Sanford v. Stillitano, supra; Omrami v. Socrates, 227 A.D.2d 459; Cofrancesco v. Murino, 225 A.D.2d 648).
S. Miller, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.