From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ammonds v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 12, 1987
126 A.D.2d 504 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

January 12, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Levine, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the defendant's motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

It is incumbent upon the court to decide in the first instance whether a plaintiff has established a prima facie case of serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Licari v. Elliott, 57 N.Y.2d 230, 237). The proof submitted by the plaintiff in connection with the defendant's summary judgment motion failed to establish a prima facie case of serious injury. Therefore, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment (see, Lorenzo v. Witt, 118 A.D.2d 628). Mangano, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ammonds v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 12, 1987
126 A.D.2d 504 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Ammonds v. Rodriguez

Case Details

Full title:PEARLINE AMMONDS, Respondent, v. HARRY RODRIGUEZ, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 12, 1987

Citations

126 A.D.2d 504 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Tsamos v. Cataldo

Insurance Law § 5102 (d) defines "serious injury" as "a personal injury which results in death;…

Sefcik v. Passanisi

Insurance Law § 5102 (d) defines "serious injury" as "a personal injury which results in death;…