From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diers v. Valerio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 2, 2000
276 A.D.2d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted September 13, 2000

October 2, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated October 1, 1999, which, inter alia, granted the defendants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff Sandra Diers did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).

Michael G. LoRusso, Melville, N.Y., for appellants.

Schondebare Brown, LLP, Ronkonkoma, N.Y. (Dennis M. Brown and Amy B. Korcz of counsel), for respondents.

Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendants submitted admissible evidence demonstrating that the injured plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d), and that the plaintiff failed to come forward with competent evidence to create an issue of fact (see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 958 Cabri v. Myung-Soo Park, 260 A.D.2d 525; Stipes v. Kopf, 255 A.D.2d 502; Lebron v. Camacho, 251 A.D.2d 295; Gutierrez v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 240 A.D.2d 469). In light of our determination, it is unnecessary to reach the plaintiffs' remaining contention.


Summaries of

Diers v. Valerio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 2, 2000
276 A.D.2d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Diers v. Valerio

Case Details

Full title:SANDRA DIERS, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. DOUGLAS G. VALERIO, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Oct 2, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
713 N.Y.S.2d 700

Citing Cases

Saccente v. Simon

Furthermore, plaintiff did not provide any recent medical evidence in opposition to the instant application;…