From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrigan v. Hertz Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 30, 2000
276 A.D.2d 747 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted September 27, 2000.

October 30, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berke, J.), dated January 12, 2000, which denied their respective motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them based upon the failure of the plaintiff Cheryl B. Harrigan to sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).

Rubin, Baum, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Anthony Marino and Christopher P. Kohn of counsel), for appellant Hertz Corp.

George F. Sacco, Staten Island, N.Y. (Anthony Marino of counsel), for appellant Damon Story.

Rubinstein Rynecki, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Randee Rubenstein of counsel), for respondents.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the motion papers submitted by the defendants failed to establish a prima facie case that the injuries sustained by the plaintiff Cheryl B. Harrigan were not serious within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) (see, Feuerman v. Achtar, 246 A.D.2d 577; Mendola v. Demetres, 212 A.D.2d 515).


Summaries of

Harrigan v. Hertz Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 30, 2000
276 A.D.2d 747 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Harrigan v. Hertz Corp.

Case Details

Full title:CHERYL B. HARRIGAN, ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. HERTZ CORP., ET AL., APPELLANTS

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

Date published: Oct 30, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 747 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 334