Peltsman v. Gallagher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Peltsman v. Gallagher

2 A.D.3d 611, 768 N.Y.S.2d 347

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

DecidedDecember 15, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.3d 611 (Peltsman v. Gallagher) 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

Peltsman v. Gallagher, 2 A.D.3d 611, 768 N.Y.S.2d 347 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cammer, J.), dated July 23, 2002, as granted the defendant’s cross 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 insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]). The affirmations of the plaintiffs physicians submitted in opposition were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Friedmann, H. Miller and Crane, 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, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cammer, J.), dated July 23, 2002, as granted the defendant’s cross 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 insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]). The affirmations of the plaintiffs physicians submitted in opposition were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Friedmann, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.3d 611, 768 N.Y.S.2d 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peltsman-v-gallagher-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack