Cracolici v. Lassiter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cracolici v. Lassiter

57 A.D.3d 708, 868 N.Y.2d 905

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 16, 2008·Published

Opinion

The movants failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff Scott M. Cracolici (hereinafter the injured 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]). Since the movants failed to meet their initial burden, their motion for summary judgment should have been denied without regard to the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Hughes v Cai, 31 AD3d 385, 385-386 [2006]; see also Coscia v 938 Trading Corp., 283 AD2d 538 [2001]). Fisher, J.E, Lifson, Covello, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

The movants failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff Scott M. Cracolici (hereinafter the injured 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]). Since the movants failed to meet their initial burden, their motion for summary judgment should have been denied without regard to the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Hughes v Cai, 31 AD3d 385, 385-386 [2006]; see also Coscia v 938 Trading Corp., 283 AD2d 538 [2001]). Fisher, J.E, Lifson, Covello, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.

Cracolici v. Lassiter, 57 A.D.3d 708, 868 N.Y.2d 905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

57 A.D.3d 708 (Cracolici v. Lassiter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related