Rose v. City of New Rochelle

57 A.D.3d 506, 867 N.Y.2d 696
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 2, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 A.D.3d 506 (Rose v. City of New Rochelle) 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
Rose v. City of New Rochelle, 57 A.D.3d 506, 867 N.Y.2d 696 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

The appellants’ proof failed to eliminate all issues of fact as to whether, as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident, the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and thus failed to make a prima facie showing that the appellants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Under these circumstances, it is not necessary to consider the sufficiency of the plaintiffs opposition papers (see Tchjevskaia v [507]*507Chase, 15 AD3d 389 [2005]). Santucci, J.E, Covello, Leventhal and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Thaler v. Felsberg
91 A.D.3d 850 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 A.D.3d 506, 867 N.Y.2d 696, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-v-city-of-new-rochelle-nyappdiv-2008.