From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meling v. Chatsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 21, 2005
19 A.D.3d 244 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

6398.

June 21, 2005.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sherry Klein Heitler, J., and a jury), entered March 24, 2003, in favor of defendants and against plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Barbara A. Meling, appellant pro se.

Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman Dicker, LLP, New York (Domenick L. D'Angelica of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Tom, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Ellerin and Catterson, JJ.


The jury's finding that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345, 350-351) is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence ( see McDermott v. Coffee Beanery, Ltd., 9 AD3d 195, 206), including the testimony of her own physician. The lay testimony challenged by plaintiff was properly admitted as relevant to her physical condition and credibility. We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Meling v. Chatsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 21, 2005
19 A.D.3d 244 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Meling v. Chatsky

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA MELING, Appellant, v. JOHN CHATSKY et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Jun 21, 2005

Citations

19 A.D.3d 244 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
797 N.Y.S.2d 753