Colon v. Thiesen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Colon v. Thiesen

259 A.D.2d 987, 689 N.Y.S.2d 885, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3335

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

DecidedMarch 31, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D.2d 987 (Colon v. Thiesen) 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

Colon v. Thiesen, 259 A.D.2d 987, 689 N.Y.S.2d 885, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3335 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff Luz C. Colon did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Even assuming, arguendo, that defendants met their initial burden, we conclude that plaintiffs presented sufficient proof in admissible form to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Hurlbutt and Callahan, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff Luz C. Colon did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Even assuming, arguendo, that defendants met their initial burden, we conclude that plaintiffs presented sufficient proof in admissible form to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Hurlbutt and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 987, 689 N.Y.S.2d 885, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colon-v-thiesen-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack