Elter v. Ritvo
This text of 228 A.D.2d 410 (Elter v. Ritvo) 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.
Opinion
Material questions of fact remain as to whether the plaintiff John R. Elter suffered a "serious injury” as defined by Insuranee Law § 5102 (d) and whether the injury was proximately caused by the accident (see, Beckett v Conte, 176 AD2d 774; Petrone v Thornton, 166 AD2d 513; Gokey v Castine, 163 AD2d 709; Partlow v Meehan, 155 AD2d 647; Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment on these issues. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
228 A.D.2d 410, 643 N.Y.2d 424, 643 N.Y.S.2d 424, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elter-v-ritvo-nyappdiv-1996.