From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Khodadadian v. Wolff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 29, 1997
242 A.D.2d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

September 29, 1997

Appeal from Supreme Court, Nassau County (Davis, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The physician's affirmation and medical report submitted by the defendant in support of his motion for summary judgment demonstrated that the plaintiff sustained a limitation in the range of motion in his cervical, dorsal, and lumbosacral spine which, under certain circumstances, may constitute a serious injury ( see, Bates v. Peeples, 171 A.D.2d 635). Nevertheless, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the 1991 accident was a proximate cause of the claimed spinal injuries ( see, Cacaccio v Martin, 235 A.D.2d 384; Waaland v. Weiss, 228 A.D.2d 435; Beckett v Conte, 176 A.D.2d 774).

Miller, J.P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Khodadadian v. Wolff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 29, 1997
242 A.D.2d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Khodadadian v. Wolff

Case Details

Full title:PARVIS K. KHODADADIAN, Appellant, v. DOUGLAS E. WOLFF, Respondent

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1997

Citations

242 A.D.2d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
664 N.Y.S.2d 950

Citing Cases

Stowe v. Simmons

us injury because the report failed to indicate any objective basis upon which the physician determined the…

Nikolopolous v. Brown

physician's affirmation, dated over eight years after the accident, was insufficient to raise a question of…