Murrell v. Lake

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murrell v. Lake

272 A.D.2d 532, 708 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5810

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

DecidedMay 22, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 532 (Murrell v. Lake) 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

Murrell v. Lake, 272 A.D.2d 532, 708 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5810 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation appeals on behalf of the defendants from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated April 7, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the plaintiff Sahidha Murrell was a “qualified person” within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5202 (b) (see, e.g., Matter of Jones v MVAIC, 172 AD2d 942; Matter of MVAIC [Mitchell], 155 AD2d 296). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, 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, etc., the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation appeals on behalf of the defendants from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated April 7, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the plaintiff Sahidha Murrell was a “qualified person” within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5202 (b) (see, e.g., Matter of Jones v MVAIC, 172 AD2d 942; Matter of MVAIC [Mitchell], 155 AD2d 296). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 532, 708 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murrell-v-lake-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack