Simmons v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simmons v. New York City Transit Authority

66 A.D.2d 432, 888 N.Y.S.2d 7

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 8, 2009·Published

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered January 30, 2008, after a jury trial, awarding damages for personal injuries and bringing up for review, inter alia, the denial of defendants’ motion at the close of evidence for judgment as a matter of law, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendants’ motion granted, and the complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case of serious injury under either a quantitative or qualitative analysis (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345, 350-351 [2002]). Plaintiffs [433] testimony indicated that he suffered relatively minor restrictions, such as a limited ability to play pool and lift heavy objects, which is insufficient to establish serious injury absent an objective showing of restrictions (see Toure at 350-351; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]; Scheer v Koubek, 70 NY2d 678 [1987]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered January 30, 2008, after a jury trial, awarding damages for personal injuries and bringing up for review, inter alia, the denial of defendants’ motion at the close of evidence for judgment as a matter of law, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendants’ motion granted, and the complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case of serious injury under either a quantitative or qualitative analysis (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345, 350-351 [2002]). Plaintiffs [433] testimony indicated that he suffered relatively minor restrictions, such as a limited ability to play pool and lift heavy objects, which is insufficient to establish serious injury absent an objective showing of restrictions (see Toure at 350-351; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]; Scheer v Koubek, 70 NY2d 678 [1987]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Simmons v. New York City Transit Authority, 66 A.D.2d 432, 888 N.Y.S.2d 7 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

66 A.D.2d 432 (Simmons v. New York City Transit Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related