From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Behm v. Radoccia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 12, 2004
6 A.D.3d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-03353.

Decided April 12, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Werner, J.), dated April 2, 2003, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that he did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).

Genser, Dubow, Genser Cona, LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Andrew M. Cohen of counsel), for appellant.

John T. Ryan, Riverhead, N.Y. (Robert F. Horvat of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, SANDRA L. TOWNES, STEPHEN G. CRANE, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The affirmation of the plaintiff's physician failed to adequately explain the two-year gap between the first examination shortly after the accident and the second examination after the defendant moved for summary judgment, and failed to describe what medical treatments, if any, the plaintiff received in the interim ( see Jiminez v. Kambli, 272 A.D.2d 581, 582; Smith v. Askew, 264 A.D.2d 834). Moreover, the physician did not satisfactorily take into account the plaintiff's medical history, which indicated preexisting herniated discs, and an automobile accident that occurred after the accident that forms the basis of this lawsuit. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Accordingly, the defendant was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, TOWNES, CRANE and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Behm v. Radoccia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 12, 2004
6 A.D.3d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Behm v. Radoccia

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM BEHM, appellant, v. RICHARD RADOCCIA, respondent

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

Date published: Apr 12, 2004

Citations

6 A.D.3d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
775 N.Y.S.2d 356

Citing Cases

Majano v. Craig

Moreover, these verified objective medical findings must be based on a recent examination of the plaintiff (…

Giandolfo v. Howarth

A cervical strain is a soft tissue injury, and "mere soft tissue injury, even if persistent or protracted,…