Rizzo v. Torchiano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rizzo v. Torchiano

57 A.D.3d 872, 868 N.Y.2d 926

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 23, 2008·Published

Opinion

The defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff John M. Rizzo did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Staubitz v Yaser, 41 AD3d 698 [2007]; O’Neal v Bronopolsky, 41 AD3d 452 [2007]; Hughes v Cai, 31 AD3d 385 [2006]). Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied without the need to consider the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ opposition papers. Fisher, J.E, Covello, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

The defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff John M. Rizzo did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Staubitz v Yaser, 41 AD3d 698 [2007]; O’Neal v Bronopolsky, 41 AD3d 452 [2007]; Hughes v Cai, 31 AD3d 385 [2006]). Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied without the need to consider the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ opposition papers. Fisher, J.E, Covello, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.

Rizzo v. Torchiano, 57 A.D.3d 872, 868 N.Y.2d 926 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

57 A.D.3d 872 (Rizzo v. Torchiano) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related