From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Connie Park v. Shaikh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 2011
82 A.D.3d 1066 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 2010-06721.

March 22, 2011.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated May 6, 2010, which denied their 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).

Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey Moskovits, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Stacy R. Seldin of counsel), for appellants.

Sim Park, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Sang J. Sim of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Dillon, J.P., Leventhal, Belen, Austin and Cohen, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants met 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 NY2d 345; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). In support of their motion, the defendants relied, inter alia, on the affirmed report of Dr. Gregory Montalbano, an orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Montalbano examined the plaintiff and, although he found that she exhibited diminished range of motion in, among other things, the lumbar region of her spine, he concluded that this symptom was caused by degenerative disc disease unrelated to the subject motor vehicle accident.

In opposition, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact by submitting reports from, inter alia, her treating physician, Dr. Michael Trimba, attesting that her limitations resulted from trauma causally related to the subject accident, rather than from degenerative disease ( see Licari v Elliott, 57 NY2d 230, 239; Compass v GAE Transp., Inc., 79 AD3d 1091). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint ( see Benitez v Lashnitz, 70 AD3d 879).


Summaries of

Connie Park v. Shaikh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 2011
82 A.D.3d 1066 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Connie Park v. Shaikh

Case Details

Full title:CONNIE PARK, Respondent, v. KOMAL H. SHAIKH et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Mar 22, 2011

Citations

82 A.D.3d 1066 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 2365
918 N.Y.S.2d 887

Citing Cases

Turcios-Rodriguez v. Velasquez

In opposition to the motion, plaintiff has raised a triable issue of fact as to whether he sustained an…

Robinson v. Buffolino

Here, defendant met his prima facie burden of showing that plaintiff did not sustain a "serious injury"…