Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
Proof of a rear-end collision with a stopped vehicle establishes a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the operator of the moving vehicle and imposes a duty on the part of the driver of the moving vehicle to explain how the accident occurred (see, LaFond v. City of New York, 245 A.D.2d 268; Leal v. Wolff, 224 A.D.2d 392, 393). Because the defendants failed to rebut the inference of negligence created by the collision, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion and cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability (see, Gladstone v. Hachuel, 225 A.D.2d 730; Leal v. Wolff supra; see also, Aromando v. City of New York, 202 A.D.2d 617).
Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.