Drake v. Wysocki

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Drake v. Wysocki

143 A.D.2d 112, 531 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8389

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 8, 1988·Published

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.), dated February 4, 1987, which denied her motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiffs had failed to meet the threshold requirements for serious injury pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff Nicasio Drake submitted medical evidence in admissible form, which established prima facie that he had suffered a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Bassett v Romano, 126 AD2d 693). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Kunzeman and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.), dated February 4, 1987, which denied her motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiffs had failed to meet the threshold requirements for serious injury pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff Nicasio Drake submitted medical evidence in admissible form, which established prima facie that he had suffered a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Bassett v Romano, 126 AD2d 693). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Kunzeman and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Drake v. Wysocki, 143 A.D.2d 112, 531 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8389 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

143 A.D.2d 112 (Drake v. Wysocki) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related