From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Herbert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 21, 2006
34 A.D.3d 345 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

9604.

November 21, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered August 24, 2005, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.


Even though the time plaintiff spent under treatment by different physicians after his accident exceeds 90 days, he failed to establish, by competent medical evidence, that during this period he was prevented from performing substantially all of the material acts constituting his customary daily activities during at least 90 of the first 180 days following the accident (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]; see Thompson v Abbasi, 15 AD3d 95, 100-101). Plaintiff's deposition testimony excerpts are insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Herbert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 21, 2006
34 A.D.3d 345 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Herbert

Case Details

Full title:FELIPE RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. JEANETTE J. HERBERT et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Nov 21, 2006

Citations

34 A.D.3d 345 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8657
825 N.Y.S.2d 37

Citing Cases

Alonso v. Hernandez

However, Plaintiff does not submit any evidence to show that any of her alleged limitations in activity or…

Lai v. Castagliola

However, Plaintiff does not submit any evidence to show that any of her alleged limitations in activity or…