Patterson v. Rivera
49 A.D.3d 337, 852 N.Y.2d 762
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 11, 2008·Published·Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
The motion was properly denied on the ground that defendants’ expert did not address the MRI reports showing herniated discs, which in conjunction with other evidence was indicative of serious injury (see Wadford v Gruz, 35 AD3d 258 [2006]; Nix v Yang Gao Xiang, 19 AD3d 227 [2005]). Since defendants failed to meet their initial burden on the motion, there is no need to consider plaintiffs opposing papers (see id.). Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Patterson v. Rivera, 49 A.D.3d 337, 852 N.Y.2d 762 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).
49 A.D.3d 337 (Patterson v. Rivera) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fernandez v. Sukhdeep
2026 NY Slip Op 00422 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026)
Jeffers v. Styte Transit Inc.
99 A.D.3d 576 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Beazer v. Webster
70 A.D.3d 587 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Takahisa Onishi v. N & B Taxi, Inc.
51 A.D.3d 594 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)