ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of the cross motion which was for partial summary judgment is dismissed, as the appellants are not aggrieved thereby; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
ORDERED that Ramon Almonte and Luz Rodriguez are awarded one bill of costs.
The submission of an unsworn motor vehicle report prepared by the defendant Tekle A. Hailu was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact on the issue of whether the plaintiff Mark Cruz was responsible for the rear-end collision by causing the vehicle he was operating to stop short in front of the yellow cab driven by Hailu and owned by the defendant Marsha Operating Corp. (hereinafter Marsha) ( see, Itingen v. Weinstein, 260 A.D.2d 440 [2d Dept., Apr. 12, 1999]; Johnson v. Phillips, 261 A.D.2d 269 [1st Dept., May 20, 1999]; Hegy v. Coller, 262 A.D.2d 606 [2d Dept., June 28, 1999]; Ribowsky v. Kashinsky, 234 A.D.2d 353).
In addition, Cruz's unrebutted deposition testimony that his vehicle was completely stopped for 30 seconds before being struck was, as a matter of law, sufficient to impose liability solely on Hailu and Marsha ( see, Johnson v. Phillips, supra; see also Escobar v. Rodriguez, 243 A.D.2d 676; Bando-Twomey v. Richheimer, 229 A.D.2d 554, 555). The fact that Cruz was unlicensed failed to demonstrate that he was negligent, as the absence or possession of a driver's license relates only to the authority for operating a vehicle, and not to its manner of operation ( see, Hanley v. Albano, 20 A.D.2d 644; see also, Dalal v. City of New York, 262 A.D.2d 596 [2d Dept., June 28, 1999]).
The application to impose sanctions on Hailu and Marsha is without merit.
S. MILLER, J.P., SULLIVAN, FRIEDMANN, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.