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

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 8, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 66 A.D.2d 432 (Simmons v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

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

Pincite

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]*433testimony 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]*433testimony 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 A.D.2d 432, 888 N.Y.S.2d 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack