Coward v. Thornton

283 A.D.2d 603, 725 N.Y.S.2d 227, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5508

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Henry C. Thornton appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated July 5, 2000, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him 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 Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion as he failed to make out a prima facie case of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Chaplin v Taylor, 273 AD2d 188; Flanagan v Hoeg, 212 AD2d 756, 757; Boehm v Estate of Mack, 255 AD2d 749). Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

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

Coward v. Thornton, 283 A.D.2d 603, 725 N.Y.S.2d 227, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5508 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

283 A.D.2d 603 (Coward v. Thornton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Flanagan v. Hoeg
212 A.D.2d 756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Boehm v. Estate of Mack
255 A.D.2d 749 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Chaplin v. Taylor
273 A.D.2d 188 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)