From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Colon v. Lopez

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 16, 2015
134 A.D.3d 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

2014-11911 Index No. 703056/12.

12-16-2015

Christian COLON, appellant, v. Juan LOPEZ, et al., respondents.

William Pager, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Cartiglia, Connolly & Russo, Garden City, N.Y. (Lynne M. Nolan of counsel), for respondents.


William Pager, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Cartiglia, Connolly & Russo, Garden City, N.Y. (Lynne M. Nolan of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Greco, Jr., J.), dated October 28, 2014, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345, 746 N.Y.S.2d 865, 774 N.E.2d 1197; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 956–957, 582 N.Y.S.2d 990, 591 N.E.2d 1176). The papers submitted by the defendants failed to adequately address the plaintiff's claim, set forth in the bill of particulars, that he sustained a serious injury under the 90/180–day category of Insurance Law § 5102(d) (see che hong kim v. kossoff, 90 a.d.3d 969, 934 n.y.s.2d 867; Rouach v. Betts, 71 A.D.3d 977, 897 N.Y.S.2d 242).

In light of the defendants' failure to meet their prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to determine whether the papers submitted by the plaintiff in opposition were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Che Hong Kim v. Kossoff, 90 A.D.3d at 969, 934 N.Y.S.2d 867). Therefore, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

BALKIN, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Colon v. Lopez

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 16, 2015
134 A.D.3d 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Colon v. Lopez

Case Details

Full title:Christian COLON, appellant, v. Juan LOPEZ, et al., respondents.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 16, 2015

Citations

134 A.D.3d 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 9245
20 N.Y.S.3d 899