Boskey v. GTWY, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Boskey v. GTWY, Inc.

78 A.D.3d 1095, 911 N.Y.S.2d 650

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 30, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 78 A.D.3d 1095 (Boskey v. GTWY, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boskey v. GTWY, Inc., 78 A.D.3d 1095, 911 N.Y.S.2d 650 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Silber, J.), dated February 8, 2010, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants met their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). In opposition, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a seri[1096]*1096ous injury to her cervical spine under the permanent consequential limitation of use or the significant limitation of use category of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Evans v Pitt, 77 AD3d 611 [2010]; Tai Ho Kang v Young Sun Cho, 74 AD3d 1328 [2010]; Acosta v Rubin, 2 AD3d 657 [2003]). Mastro, J.P., Florio, Dickerson, Belen and Lott, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Silber, J.), dated February 8, 2010, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants met their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). In opposition, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a seri[1096]*1096ous injury to her cervical spine under the permanent consequential limitation of use or the significant limitation of use category of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Evans v Pitt, 77 AD3d 611 [2010]; Tai Ho Kang v Young Sun Cho, 74 AD3d 1328 [2010]; Acosta v Rubin, 2 AD3d 657 [2003]). Mastro, J.P., Florio, Dickerson, Belen and Lott, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.3d 1095, 911 N.Y.S.2d 650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boskey-v-gtwy-inc-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack