Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
We find no error in the court's refusal to charge the emergency doctrine (see, PJI 2:14) in this case. The drivers of the vehicles involved in this three-vehicle, pile-up collision were not presented with any sudden and unforeseen condition. They should reasonably have anticipated and been prepared to deal with the situation with which they were confronted (see, McCarthy v Miller, 139 A.D.2d 500; Hardy v Sicuranza, 133 A.D.2d 138; Kowchefski v Urbanowicz, 102 A.D.2d 863).
We also find no error in the court's missing witness charge as to Gary Felder. Since Felder was the driver of the second vehicle, which was owned by the Clarkes, he was in a position to give substantial, and not merely cumulative, testimony; and, since he was the brother-in-law of Dolores Clarke, he could be considered to be available to her (see, Noce v Kaufman, 2 N.Y.2d 347; Ausch v St. Paul Fire Mar. Ins. Co., 125 A.D.2d 43; Chandler v Flynn, 111 A.D.2d 300).
We have examined the parties' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Brown, J.P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.