Eldred v. Stoddard

217 A.D.2d 952, 630 N.Y.S.2d 171, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8376
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 14, 1995·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Defendants sustained their burden of establishing prima facie that Sondra Eldred (plaintiff) did not sustain a serious injury. The burden thus shifted to plaintiff to come forward with evidence that she suffered a serious injury within one of several categories enumerated in the statute (see, Insurance Law § 5102 [d]; Shames v Murtha, 204 AD2d 841). Plaintiff failed to sustain her burden of making [953] " 'a prima facie showing of serious injury sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact’ ” (Logan v Laidlaw School Tr., 175 AD2d 568, 569) with respect to "medically determined injury or impairment of a non-permanent nature which prevents [her] from performing substantially all of the material acts which constitute [her] usual and customary daily activities for not less than ninety days during the one hundred eighty days immediately following the occurrence of the injury or impairment” (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Nor did plaintiff offer proof that she suffered a "significant limitation of use of a body function or system” (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). The opinion of plaintiff’s physician that plaintiff suffers from chronic pain syndrome is based upon plaintiff’s subjective complaints of pain and is unsupported by any objective medical evidence (see, Logan v Laidlaw School Tr., supra). The physician’s affidavit, which appears to have been tailored to meet statutory requirements, was not sufficient to establish a serious injury (see, Antorino v Mordes, 202 AD2d 528; Dubois v Simpson, 182 AD2d 993). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Scudder, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Callahan, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

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

Eldred v. Stoddard, 217 A.D.2d 952, 630 N.Y.S.2d 171, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8376 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

217 A.D.2d 952 (Eldred v. Stoddard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mueller v. SEATAINER TRANSPORT, LTD.
816 F. Supp. 2d 206 (W.D. New York, 2011)
Latiuk v. Cona
272 A.D.2d 988 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Lynch v. Williams
265 A.D.2d 870 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Rivera v. United States
994 F. Supp. 406 (E.D. New York, 1998)
Rawa v. Kroeger
229 A.D.2d 947 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Borrman v. Bogold
229 A.D.2d 949 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Reeves v. Scopaz
227 A.D.2d 606 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)