Castaldo v. Migliore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Castaldo v. Migliore

291 A.D.2d 526, 737 N.Y.S.2d 862, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1949

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

DecidedFebruary 25, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 291 A.D.2d 526 (Castaldo v. Migliore) 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

Castaldo v. Migliore, 291 A.D.2d 526, 737 N.Y.S.2d 862, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated May 8, 2001, 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 reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The defendants established a prima facie case that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury through the affirmed medical reports of a neurologist and an orthopedist who examined him and concluded that he sustained nothing more than sprains and strains (see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957).

The medical evidence submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the motion failed to set forth verified objective medical findings that were based on a recent examination of the plaintiff [527]*527(see, Grossman v Wright, 268 AD2d 79). Accordingly, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLÉ 3212 [b]). Altman, J.P., Smith, Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, 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, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated May 8, 2001, 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 reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The defendants established a prima facie case that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury through the affirmed medical reports of a neurologist and an orthopedist who examined him and concluded that he sustained nothing more than sprains and strains (see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957).

The medical evidence submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the motion failed to set forth verified objective medical findings that were based on a recent examination of the plaintiff [527]*527(see, Grossman v Wright, 268 AD2d 79). Accordingly, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLÉ 3212 [b]). Altman, J.P., Smith, Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.D.2d 526, 737 N.Y.S.2d 862, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castaldo-v-migliore-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack