Palmer v. Phillips
This text of 278 A.D.2d 466 (Palmer v. Phillips) 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.
Opinion
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated November 22, 1999, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Thus, it was incumbent on the plaintiff to come forward with sufficient admissible evidence to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). The plaintiff failed to do so, and thus the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see, Guzman v Michael Mgt, 266 AD2d 508; Lisa v Pastor, 262 AD2d 368; Kauderer v Penta, 261 AD2d 365; Merisca v Alford, 243 AD2d 613). Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
278 A.D.2d 466, 717 N.Y.S.2d 915, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palmer-v-phillips-nyappdiv-2000.