From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hellerer v. Guercio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 4, 2001
284 A.D.2d 303 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted May 9, 2001.

June 4, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brandveen, J.), dated August 24, 2000, which, inter alia, granted the defendants' cross 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).

Alfred M. Infosino, Delray Beach, Fla., pro hac vice, for appellant.

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

Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, P.J., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, ANITA R. FLORIO and HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants submitted sufficient evidence to establish, as a matter of law, that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law — 5102(d). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to come forward with sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955; Dennis v. Van Bergen-Henegouwen, A.D.2d [2d Dept., Mar. 5, 2001]; Grossman v. Wright, 268 A.D.2d 79). Therefore, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment.

In light of our determination, we do not reach the plaintiff's remaining contention.

BRACKEN, P.J., FRIEDMANN, FLORIO and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hellerer v. Guercio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 4, 2001
284 A.D.2d 303 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Hellerer v. Guercio

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD R. HELLERER, APPELLANT, v. FRANCESCO GUERCIO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS

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

Date published: Jun 4, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 303 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
725 N.Y.S.2d 555