Taylor v. Gin Cabel Trucking, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Taylor v. Gin Cabel Trucking, Inc.

7 A.D.3d 272, 776 N.Y.S.2d 249, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6578

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 6, 2004·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[273] Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan J. Saks, J.), entered on or about April 22, 2003, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants in this personal injury action met their burden of establishing, through the submitted reports of medical experts, that plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury as defined in Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Plaintiff failed to present sufficient objective evidence to overcome these submissions by demonstrating she had sustained such an injury that prevented resumption of her normal and customary activities, especially in light of the lSVa-month gap between the last documented examination by her own physician and the one examination by her medical expert, Dr. Hausknecht (see Vaughan v Baez, 305 AD2d 101 [2003]). Concur—Buckley, PJ., Nardelli, Andrias, Sullivan and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

[273] Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan J. Saks, J.), entered on or about April 22, 2003, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants in this personal injury action met their burden of establishing, through the submitted reports of medical experts, that plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury as defined in Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Plaintiff failed to present sufficient objective evidence to overcome these submissions by demonstrating she had sustained such an injury that prevented resumption of her normal and customary activities, especially in light of the lSVa-month gap between the last documented examination by her own physician and the one examination by her medical expert, Dr. Hausknecht (see Vaughan v Baez, 305 AD2d 101 [2003]). Concur—Buckley, PJ., Nardelli, Andrias, Sullivan and Gonzalez, JJ.

Taylor v. Gin Cabel Trucking, Inc., 7 A.D.3d 272, 776 N.Y.S.2d 249, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6578 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

7 A.D.3d 272 (Taylor v. Gin Cabel Trucking, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related