Scott v. Gresio

90 A.D.3d 736, 934 N.Y.2d 351
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 13, 2011
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 90 A.D.3d 736 (Scott v. Gresio) 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
Scott v. Gresio, 90 A.D.3d 736, 934 N.Y.2d 351 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

The defendant failed to meet his prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the [737]*737meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The plaintiff alleged, inter alia, that the lumbar region of her spine sustained certain injuries as a result of the subject accident. Although the defendant asserted that those alleged injuries did not constitute a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d at 352; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d at 955-956), his examining neurologist recounted, in an affirmed report submitted in support of the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, that range-of-motion testing performed during the examination revealed the existence of a significant limitation of motion in the region (see Walter v Walch, 88 AD3d 872, 872 [2011]; Cues v Tavarone, 85 AD3d 846, 846-847 [2011]).

Since the defendant failed to meet his prima facie burden, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, without considering whether the plaintiffs opposition papers were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Cues v Tavarone, 85 AD3d at 846-847). Rivera, J.E, Florio, Eng, Hall and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cruz v. Advanced Concrete Leasing Corp.
101 A.D.3d 666 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
India v. O'Connor
97 A.D.3d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Little v. Ajah
97 A.D.3d 801 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Connolly v. Peerless Insurance
873 F. Supp. 2d 493 (E.D. New York, 2012)
Raguso v. Ubriaco
97 A.D.3d 560 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Luigi v. Avis Cab Co.
96 A.D.3d 809 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Affordable Community, Inc. v. Simon
95 A.D.3d 1047 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Caracciolo v. Elmont Fire District
94 A.D.3d 799 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Jones v. Anderson
93 A.D.3d 640 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Kearney v. Garrett
92 A.D.3d 725 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Echevarria v. G&G Classic, Inc.
91 A.D.3d 902 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 A.D.3d 736, 934 N.Y.2d 351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-gresio-nyappdiv-2011.