From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cruz v. Calabiza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 23, 1996
226 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 23, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.).


The IAS Court correctly held that the affidavits submitted by plaintiff and her treating physicians, which make only general references to the alleged pain plaintiff continues to suffer and the alleged permanency of her condition, and which fail to specify either the nature of the limitations on the use of any body functions or organs or to state with particularity how the alleged pain affects plaintiff's routine daily activities, were insufficient to overcome defendants' prima facie showing that plaintiff's injuries were not serious within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955; Klapper v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 127 A.D.2d 566; compare, Mooney v. Ovitt, 100 A.D.2d 702).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Ellerin, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Cruz v. Calabiza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 23, 1996
226 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Cruz v. Calabiza

Case Details

Full title:JOSEFINA CRUZ, Appellant, v. JESUS CALABIZA et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 23, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
641 N.Y.S.2d 255

Citing Cases

Granf v. United Pavers

In order to establish a claim under the 90/180 category, there must be proof that plaintiff's usual and…

Eteng v. Dajos Transp.

In order to establish a claim under the 90/180 category, there must be proof that plaintiff's usual and…