Charley v. Goss

New York Court of Appeals

Charley v. Goss

904 N.E.2d 837, 12 N.Y.3d 750

New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 24, 2009·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

Defendants Howard Conroy and Margaret Goss presented prima facie evidence, including plaintiffs deposition testimony and medical records, that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Toure v *751 Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]). In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

Defendants Howard Conroy and Margaret Goss presented prima facie evidence, including plaintiffs deposition testimony and medical records, that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Toure v *751 Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]). In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Charley v. Goss, 904 N.E.2d 837, 12 N.Y.3d 750 (N.Y. 2009).

Pincite

904 N.E.2d 837 (Charley v. Goss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related