Finsterer v. Estreicher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Finsterer v. Estreicher

250 A.D.2d 729, 672 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5816

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

DecidedMay 18, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D.2d 729 (Finsterer v. Estreicher) 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

Finsterer v. Estreicher, 250 A.D.2d 729, 672 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5816 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated [730]*730October 15, 1997, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the plaintiffs failure to sustain a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLR 3212 [b]) as to whether she sustained a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, 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 plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated [730]*730October 15, 1997, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the plaintiffs failure to sustain a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLR 3212 [b]) as to whether she sustained a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 729, 672 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5816, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/finsterer-v-estreicher-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack