green
Positive treatment
11.1 score
G Cite
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
BOROSZKO, BRENDA M. v. ZYLINSKI, GERALD J.
We note at the outset that plaintiffs limit their appeal to the permanent consequential limitation of use and significant limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and therefore they have abandoned the other remaining category of serious injury alleged in their bills of particulars, i.e., permanent loss of use (see Fanti v McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2013]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
FRENCH, JAMES R. v. SYMBORSKI, DAUN M.
Plaintiff’s treating physician, on the other hand, disagreed with the assessment of defendants’ expert that there was no evidence of traumatic injury, based on her review of plaintiffs MRI films and medical records and the fact that plaintiff was asymptomatic prior to the accident, as demonstrated by plaintiffs “medical history” and the fact that his “pre-existing degenerative changes” did not “prompt him to seek any medical attention” (see generally Fanti v McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2013]; Verkey v Hebard, 99 AD3d 1205, 1206 [2012]; Austin v Rent A Ctr.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
CLARK, NANCY E. v. AQUINO, TIFFANY
Defendant’s own expert physician concluded that plaintiff had sustained a cervical strain as a result of the accident and that she was “free of ongoing neck pain” prior to the accident, and the medical records support those conclusions (see Fanti v McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2013]; Verkey v Hebard, 99 AD3d 1205, 1206 [2012]; Ashquabe v McConnell, 46 AD3d 1419, 1419 [2007]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Durante v. Hogan
With respect to the remaining categories, “[a]lthough defendants contended in support of their motion that [plaintiff’s] injuries were attributable to [a] prior accident [ ], they failed to submit evidence establishing as a matter of law that the injuries were entirely attributable to [that] prior accident[ ] and were not exacerbated by the accident in question” (Benson v Lillie, 72 AD3d 1619, 1620 [2010]; see Fanti v McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2013]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Durante v. Hogan
With respect to the remaining categories, “[a]lthough defendants contended in support of their motion that [plaintiff’s] injuries were attributable to [a] prior accident [ ], they failed to submit evidence establishing as a matter of law that the injuries were entirely attributable to [that] prior accident[ ] and were not exacerbated by the accident in question” (Benson v Lillie, 72 AD3d 1619, 1620 [2010]; see Fanti v McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2013]).
discussed
Cited "see"
DURANTE, CARMINE v. HOGAN, MICHAEL
With respect to the remaining categories, “[a]lthough defendants contended in support of their motion that [plaintiff’s] injuries were attributable to [a] prior accident[], they failed to submit evidence establishing as a matter of law that the injuries were entirely attributable to [that] prior accident[] and were not exacerbated by the accident in question” (Benson v Lillie, 72 AD3d 1619, 1620 ; see Fanti v McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493, 1494 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Starr L. Roshia
v.
Christopher J. Thiel
v.
Christopher J. Thiel
Appeal No. 2.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Oct 4, 2013.
Published
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Kevin M. Carter, J.), entered May 16, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4. The order confirmed the finding of the Support Magistrate that respondent willfully failed to obey an order of the Court.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Same memorandum as in Matter of Roshia v Thiel (110 AD3d 1490 [2013]). Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Sconiers, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.