Wojas v. Cossentino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wojas v. Cossentino

271 A.D.2d 602, 707 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4317

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

DecidedApril 17, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 602 (Wojas v. Cossentino) 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

Wojas v. Cossentino, 271 A.D.2d 602, 707 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), dated June 1, 1999, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The affirmed reports prepared by the defendants’ experts, which were submitted in support of the motion, made out a prima facie case that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The affidavit of the plaintiffs expert failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLR 3212 [b]). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio 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 plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), dated June 1, 1999, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The affirmed reports prepared by the defendants’ experts, which were submitted in support of the motion, made out a prima facie case that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The affidavit of the plaintiffs expert failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLR 3212 [b]). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 602, 707 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wojas-v-cossentino-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack