Fest v. Agnew

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fest v. Agnew

68 A.D.3d 1051, 890 N.Y.2d 357

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

DecidedDecember 22, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 68 A.D.3d 1051 (Fest v. Agnew) 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

Fest v. Agnew, 68 A.D.3d 1051, 890 N.Y.2d 357 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant Sergey Barbashov established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence, including the plaintiffs deposition testimony and the affirmation of Barbashov’s retained examining orthopedist, that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Charley v Goss, 12 NY3d 750 [2009]; Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]; Luckey v Bauch, 17 AD3d 411 [2005]; Sims v Megaris, 15 AD3d 468 [2005]; Check v Gacevk, 14 AD3d 586 [2005]; Paul v Trerotola, 11 AD3d 441 [2004]; Mastaccioula v Sciarra, 11 AD3d 434 [2004]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Rivera, J.E, Covello, Angiolillo, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

The defendant Sergey Barbashov established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence, including the plaintiffs deposition testimony and the affirmation of Barbashov’s retained examining orthopedist, that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Charley v Goss, 12 NY3d 750 [2009]; Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]; Luckey v Bauch, 17 AD3d 411 [2005]; Sims v Megaris, 15 AD3d 468 [2005]; Check v Gacevk, 14 AD3d 586 [2005]; Paul v Trerotola, 11 AD3d 441 [2004]; Mastaccioula v Sciarra, 11 AD3d 434 [2004]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Rivera, J.E, Covello, Angiolillo, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 A.D.3d 1051, 890 N.Y.2d 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fest-v-agnew-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack