Simon v. Econocraft Worldwide Mfg., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simon v. Econocraft Worldwide Mfg., Inc.

38 A.D.3d 303, 830 N.Y.S.2d 661

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

DecidedMarch 13, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.3d 303 (Simon v. Econocraft Worldwide Mfg., Inc.) 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

Simon v. Econocraft Worldwide Mfg., Inc., 38 A.D.3d 303, 830 N.Y.S.2d 661 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dianne T. Renwick, J.), entered June 21, 2006, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, adhered, on reargument, to a prior order granting the corporate defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeals from orders, same court and Justice, entered December 19, 2005, and February 8, 2006, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superseded by the appeal from the order on reargument.

Plaintiff was hit by defendants’ truck on December 18, 2003, but acknowledges on appeal that she sustained no “serious injuries” as defined in Insurance Law § 5102. Two and a half weeks later, she fell at home, fracturing her heel. Plaintiff thereupon commenced this action, alleging that the serious injuries sustained in the domestic accident were proximately caused by the earlier accident.

Summary dismissal was properly granted because plaintiff failed to present sufficient competent medical evidence. The physicians’ reliance on plaintiffs statements to them that her first accident caused her second accident amounts to nothing more than speculation, and falls far short of the standard of a reasonable degree of certainty that expert opinion evidence is required to meet (DeFilippo v New York Downtown Hosp., 10 AD3d 521, 523 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Buckley, Sweeny and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dianne T. Renwick, J.), entered June 21, 2006, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, adhered, on reargument, to a prior order granting the corporate defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeals from orders, same court and Justice, entered December 19, 2005, and February 8, 2006, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superseded by the appeal from the order on reargument.

Plaintiff was hit by defendants’ truck on December 18, 2003, but acknowledges on appeal that she sustained no “serious injuries” as defined in Insurance Law § 5102. Two and a half weeks later, she fell at home, fracturing her heel. Plaintiff thereupon commenced this action, alleging that the serious injuries sustained in the domestic accident were proximately caused by the earlier accident.

Summary dismissal was properly granted because plaintiff failed to present sufficient competent medical evidence. The physicians’ reliance on plaintiffs statements to them that her first accident caused her second accident amounts to nothing more than speculation, and falls far short of the standard of a reasonable degree of certainty that expert opinion evidence is required to meet (DeFilippo v New York Downtown Hosp., 10 AD3d 521, 523 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Buckley, Sweeny and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 303, 830 N.Y.S.2d 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simon-v-econocraft-worldwide-mfg-inc-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack