Plaintiff's assertion that the car in which he was a passenger was struck from behind by a car owned and operated by defendants established a prima facie case of defendants' negligence, and absent any explanation from defendants for the collision, was sufficient to entitle plaintiff to summary judgment against defendants on the issue of liability ( Aromando v. City of New York, 202 A.D.2d 617, quoting Silberman v. Surrey Cadillac Limousine Serv., 109 A.D.2d 833). We note that such finding, however, does not resolve any pertinent apportionment of fault between the defendants, including the owner and operator of the car in which plaintiff was a passenger ( see, Silberman v. Surrey Cadillac Limousine Serv., supra). Concerning the issue of serious injury, it was plaintiff's burden to make a prima facie showing of such on his motion for summary judgment ( Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853); having failed to do so, the issue was properly left for trial.
We have considered the parties' other arguments for affirmative relief and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Wallach, Rubin, Kupferman and Mazzarelli, JJ.