In Cajas-Romero v. Ward, 106 A.D.3d 850 (2d Dept. 2013) the defendant claimed he came to a full stop behind the plaintiff at a red light and when the light turned green, he followed the plaintiff into the intersection at a speed of about five miles per hour. He further stated that upon entering the intersection, plaintiff's vehicle stopped short and he was unable to stop in time and struck the plaintiff's vehicle. The Court held: "Although the defendant's version of the events leading to the subject rear-end collision differed from the plaintiffs' version of events, the defendant's version of events, even if accepted as true, did not raise a triable issue of fact as to the existence of a nonnegligent explanation for the rear-end collision. The fact that the defendant was traveling extremely close behind the plaintiffs' vehicle without leaving a reasonable distance created the possibility that a sudden stop would be necessary, and, by his own admission, the defendant clearly breached his duty to maintain a reasonably safe distance from the plaintiffs' vehicle, which he was following (see Ayach v. Ghazal, 25 A.D.3d 742, 808 N.Y.S.2d 759; Pappas v. Opitz, 262 A.D.2d 471, 692 N.Y.S.2d 127)."