Pringle v. Roussan
This text of 23 A.D.3d 636 (Pringle v. Roussan) 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 defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated September 22, 2004, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In opposition to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff submitted evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Agyeman v Osei-Owusu, 15 AD3d 599 [2005]). Cozier, J.P., Luciano, Fisher and Covello, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 A.D.3d 636, 804 N.Y.S.2d 265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pringle-v-roussan-nyappdiv-2005.