Lorenzo v. Mass, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lorenzo v. Mass, Inc.

287 A.D.2d 602, 731 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9833

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 22, 2001·Published

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Mass, Inc., ap[603]*603peals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated May 2, 2001, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it 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 appellant submitted proof in admissible form demonstrating its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Grossman v Wright, 268 AD2d 79, 83-84). In opposition, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Grossman v Wright, supra; Boehm v Estate of Mack, 255 AD2d 749). Ritter, J. P., Goldstein, Friedmann, Feuerstein and Crane, 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 defendant Mass, Inc., ap[603]*603peals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated May 2, 2001, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it 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 appellant submitted proof in admissible form demonstrating its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Grossman v Wright, 268 AD2d 79, 83-84). In opposition, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Grossman v Wright, supra; Boehm v Estate of Mack, 255 AD2d 749). Ritter, J. P., Goldstein, Friedmann, Feuerstein and Crane, JJ., concur.

Lorenzo v. Mass, Inc., 287 A.D.2d 602, 731 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9833 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

287 A.D.2d 602 (Lorenzo v. Mass, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related