Knoll v. Seafood Express

New York Court of Appeals

Knoll v. Seafood Express

836 N.E.2d 1148, 5 N.Y.3d 817, 803 N.Y.S.2d 25

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 15, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 836 N.E.2d 1148 (Knoll v. Seafood Express) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Knoll v. Seafood Express, 836 N.E.2d 1148, 5 N.Y.3d 817, 803 N.Y.S.2d 25 (N.Y. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

In light of the fact that plaintiffs benign brain stem angioma condition preexisted the accident, plaintiff failed to submit medical proof sufficient to rebut defendants’ submissions and to show that he suffered a serious injury that is causally related to the accident (see Pommells v Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 580 [2005]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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