Orsenigo v. Burnstein

202 A.D.2d 561, 610 N.Y.S.2d 819, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2663
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 21, 1994·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Luciano, J.), dated September 24, 1991, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to establish that the plaintiff had suffered a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contention, we find that the affirmation submitted by the plaintiff’s treating physician was sufficient to raise a triable issue as to whether the plaintiff suffered a serious injury. In that affirmation, the physician indicated that the plaintiff had suffered a permanent disc dessication, which, based on the plaintiff’s history, was causally related to the accident. Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Orsenigo v. Burnstein, 202 A.D.2d 561, 610 N.Y.S.2d 819, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2663 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

202 A.D.2d 561 (Orsenigo v. Burnstein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ciocca v. Park
21 A.D.3d 671 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Vignola v. Varrichio
243 A.D.2d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Torres v. Micheletti
208 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)