Mastromonica v. Conklin

246 A.D.2d 581, 667 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 403
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 20, 1998·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lama, J.), dated December 19, 1996, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant’s motion papers failed to establish a prima facie case that the injuries sustained by the plaintiff Patricia Mastromonica were not serious (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; Mendola v Demetres, 212 AD2d 515). The report prepared by Ms. Mastromonica’s treating orthopedist indicated a decreased range of motion of her neck and the report of her treating dentist revealed that she was limited in her ability to open her mouth. Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Mastromonica v. Conklin, 246 A.D.2d 581, 667 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 403 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

246 A.D.2d 581 (Mastromonica v. Conklin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tillman v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority
289 A.D.2d 397 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Peschanker v. Loporto
252 A.D.2d 485 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Silverstein v. DiFasano
249 A.D.2d 293 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)