Cruz v. Ava Service Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cruz v. Ava Service Corp.

2016 NY Slip Op 8838, 145 A.D.3d 959, 42 N.Y.S.3d 859

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

DecidedDecember 28, 2016

Docket2015-05224

StatusPublished

This text of 2016 NY Slip Op 8838 (Cruz v. Ava Service Corp.) 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

Cruz v. Ava Service Corp., 2016 NY Slip Op 8838, 145 A.D.3d 959, 42 N.Y.S.3d 859 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff Dawn Cruz appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), entered April 1, 2015, which denied her motion for leave to renew her opposition to that branch of the motion of the defendants Ava Service Corp. and Ramon M. Flores which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident, which had been granted in an *960 order of the same court dated May 6, 2014, and (2) an order of the same court entered April 29, 2015, which sua sponte vacated a prior order of the same court.

Ordered that the appeal from the order entered April 29, 2015, is dismissed, as no appeal lies as of right from an order that does not decide a motion made on notice (see CPLR 5701 [a] [2]), and leave to appeal has not been granted (see CPLR 5701 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered April 1, 2015, is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants Ava Service Corp. and Ramon M. Flores.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion of the plaintiff Dawn Cruz (hereinafter the appellant) for leave to renew her opposition to that branch of the motion of the defendants Ava Service Corp. and Raman M. Flores which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the new evidence submitted would have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e]; Bauman v Ottaviano, 126 AD3d 742 [2015]; Loverde v Gill, 108 AD3d 748 [2013]).

Leventhal, J.P., Cohen, Miller and Connolly, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff Dawn Cruz appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), entered April 1, 2015, which denied her motion for leave to renew her opposition to that branch of the motion of the defendants Ava Service Corp. and Ramon M. Flores which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident, which had been granted in an *960 order of the same court dated May 6, 2014, and (2) an order of the same court entered April 29, 2015, which sua sponte vacated a prior order of the same court.

Ordered that the appeal from the order entered April 29, 2015, is dismissed, as no appeal lies as of right from an order that does not decide a motion made on notice (see CPLR 5701 [a] [2]), and leave to appeal has not been granted (see CPLR 5701 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered April 1, 2015, is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants Ava Service Corp. and Ramon M. Flores.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion of the plaintiff Dawn Cruz (hereinafter the appellant) for leave to renew her opposition to that branch of the motion of the defendants Ava Service Corp. and Raman M. Flores which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the new evidence submitted would have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e]; Bauman v Ottaviano, 126 AD3d 742 [2015]; Loverde v Gill, 108 AD3d 748 [2013]).

Leventhal, J.P., Cohen, Miller and Connolly, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2016 NY Slip Op 8838, 145 A.D.3d 959, 42 N.Y.S.3d 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cruz-v-ava-service-corp-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack