From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Webster v. Orland Rivera D. Trucking Serv., Inc.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 9, 2005
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 52014 (N.Y. App. Term 2005)

Opinion

570689/04, No. 05-021.

Decided December 9, 2005.

Defendants appeal from an order of the Civil Court, Bronx County (Francis M. Alessandro, J.), entered July 8, 2004, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Order (Francis M. Alessandro, J.), entered July 8, 2004, affirmed, with $10 costs.

PRESENT: McCooe, J.P., Gangel-Jacob, Schoenfeld, JJ., Justices.


Plaintiff was injured in September 2000 when the parked car in which he was sitting was rear-ended by defendants' truck. He was treated approximately 40 times over the next five months by a chiropractor who noted marked muscle spasms, difficulty in movement, and positive results in straight-leg raising and other tests. The chiropractor reexamined plaintiff in April 2004, finding carpal tunnel syndrome and a 20% limitation of movement and 20% decrease in flexibility in the cervical and lumbosacral spine, and concluding that the patient still exhibited a "mild partial disability" from what he described as a permanent and serious injury. Defendants' orthopedist examined plaintiff in March 2002 and found no residual spinal problems and no evidence of carpal tunnel syndrome, although he did note hypesthesia (diminished tactile sensitivity) on the right side of plaintiff's body. Defendants' neurologist examined plaintiff in the same time frame and found no evidence of permanent neurological disability.

Although the elusive standard of "serious injury" is not easily resolved ( see Brown v. Achy, 9 AD3d 30), restrictions of movement quantified by plaintiff's treating doctor with reference to objective tests, as they relate to the history of the accident, are sufficient to defeat summary judgment on this question ( Brooks v. Zises, 16 AD3d 221). Evidence that plaintiff's symptoms persisted, and that continued treatment was not helping, was sufficient to preserve the evaluation of any gap in treatment for the trier of facts ( Akamnonu v. Rodriguez, 12 AD3d 187).

This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.


Summaries of

Webster v. Orland Rivera D. Trucking Serv., Inc.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 9, 2005
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 52014 (N.Y. App. Term 2005)
Case details for

Webster v. Orland Rivera D. Trucking Serv., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:WILLIE J. WEBSTER, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ORLANDO RIVERA AND D. TRUCKING…

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

Date published: Dec 9, 2005

Citations

2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 52014 (N.Y. App. Term 2005)