Tran v. James

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tran v. James

277 A.D.2d 221, 716 N.Y.S.2d 320, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11208

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

DecidedNovember 6, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 277 A.D.2d 221 (Tran v. James) 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

Tran v. James, 277 A.D.2d 221, 716 N.Y.S.2d 320, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11208 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated November 19, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

There is a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (see, Licari v Elliott, 57 NY2d 230). Sullivan, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated November 19, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

There is a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (see, Licari v Elliott, 57 NY2d 230). Sullivan, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 A.D.2d 221, 716 N.Y.S.2d 320, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tran-v-james-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack