Galardo v. Lewis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Galardo v. Lewis

287 A.D.2d 538, 731 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9583

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

DecidedOctober 15, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 538 (Galardo v. Lewis) 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

Galardo v. Lewis, 287 A.D.2d 538, 731 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9583 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brandveen, J.), entered June 26, 2000, which granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence demonstrating that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Thus, it was incumbent upon the plaintiff to come forward with admissible evidence to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff failed to do so (see, Valencia v Siu-Ke Lui, 239 AD2d 339; see also, Paulino v Xiaoyu Dai, 279 AD2d 619; Grossman v Wright, 268 AD2d 79; Williams v Hughes, 256 AD2d 461; Marotta v Mastroianni, 273 AD2d 206). O’Brien, J. P., S. Miller, McGinity, Schmidt and Townes, 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, Nassau County (Brandveen, J.), entered June 26, 2000, which granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence demonstrating that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Thus, it was incumbent upon the plaintiff to come forward with admissible evidence to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff failed to do so (see, Valencia v Siu-Ke Lui, 239 AD2d 339; see also, Paulino v Xiaoyu Dai, 279 AD2d 619; Grossman v Wright, 268 AD2d 79; Williams v Hughes, 256 AD2d 461; Marotta v Mastroianni, 273 AD2d 206). O’Brien, J. P., S. Miller, McGinity, Schmidt and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 538, 731 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galardo-v-lewis-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack