Marquez v. Torres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marquez v. Torres

250 A.D.2d 445, 671 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5595

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

DecidedMay 14, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D.2d 445 (Marquez v. Torres) 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

Marquez v. Torres, 250 A.D.2d 445, 671 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5595 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about April 4,1997, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to make out a prima facie case of serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed for lack of evidence that the alleged curtailment of plaintiffs daily activities was attributable to a “medically determined” injury. Indeed, plaintiff failed to offer any probative medical proof whatsoever (see, McLoyrd v Pennypacker, 178 AD2d 227, lv denied 79 NY2d 754), and we see no merit to his excuse that he did not have time to obtain a sworn statement from his doctor. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about April 4,1997, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to make out a prima facie case of serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed for lack of evidence that the alleged curtailment of plaintiffs daily activities was attributable to a “medically determined” injury. Indeed, plaintiff failed to offer any probative medical proof whatsoever (see, McLoyrd v Pennypacker, 178 AD2d 227, lv denied 79 NY2d 754), and we see no merit to his excuse that he did not have time to obtain a sworn statement from his doctor. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 445, 671 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marquez-v-torres-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack