green
Positive treatment
18.6 score
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
George v. City of Syracuse
In opposition, however, plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact whether he sustained a serious injury with respect to each of those categories ( see Strangio v Vasquez , 144 AD3d 1579, 1580 [4th Dept 2016]; Pastuszynski v Lofaso , 140 AD3d 1710, 1711 [4th Dept 2016]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Barron v. Blasetti
Based on the above, we conclude that defendant's own submissions raised issues of fact with respect to plaintiff's thoracic spine injury under the significant limitation of use and permanent consequential limitation of use categories ( see generally Strangio v Vasquez , 144 AD3d 1579, 1580 [4th Dept 2016]; Aleksiejuk v Pell , 300 AD2d 1066, 1066-1067 [4th Dept 2002]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jackson v. City of Buffalo
With respect to the permanent consequential limitation of use and significant limitation of use categories of serious injury, even assuming, arguendo, that defendants met their initial burden of establishing their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, we conclude that plaintiff raised an issue of fact by submitting the expert opinion of his treating chiropractor, “who relied upon objective proof of plaintiff’s injury, provided quantifications of plaintiff’s loss of range of motion along with qualitative assessments of plaintiff’s condition, and concluded that ‘plaintiff’s inj…
discussed
Cited "see"
Grier v. Mosey
Although defendants met their initial burden on the motion by submitting “competent medical evidence establishing as a matter of law that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under either of those categories” (Robinson v Polasky, 32 AD3d 1215, 1216 [2006]; see generally Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]), plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact whether she sustained a serious injury under both categories (see Strangio v Vasquez, 144 AD3d 1579, 1580 [2016]; Pastuszynski v Lofaso, 140 AD3d 1710, 1711 [2016]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Grier v. Mosey
Although defendants met their initial burden on the motion by submitting “competent medical evidence establishing as a matter of law that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under either of those categories” (Robinson v Polasky, 32 AD3d 1215, 1216 [2006]; see generally Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]), plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact whether she sustained a serious injury under both categories (see Strangio v Vasquez, 144 AD3d 1579, 1580 [2016]; Pastuszynski v Lofaso, 140 AD3d 1710, 1711 [2016]).
discussed
Cited "see"
GRIER, TAMMY v. HALLAM, TARA L.
Although defendants met their initial burden on the motion by submitting “competent medical evidence establishing as a matter of law that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under either of those categories” (Robinson v Polasky, 32 AD3d 1215, 1216 ; see generally Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 ), plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact whether she sustained a serious injury under both categories (see Strangio v Vasquez, 144 AD3d 1579, 1580 ; Pastuszynski v Lofaso, 140 AD3d 1710, 1711 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Kerry A. Donohue, Formerly Known as Kerry A. Ives
v.
Amy Bernstein, Defendant/Third-Party and Richard Bernstein, Third-Party Plaintiff/Defendant-Appellant. Malachi Donohue, Third-Party (Appeal No. 2.)
v.
Amy Bernstein, Defendant/Third-Party and Richard Bernstein, Third-Party Plaintiff/Defendant-Appellant. Malachi Donohue, Third-Party (Appeal No. 2.)
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 10, 2016.
Carni, Centra, Curran, Troutman, Whalen.
Published
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cattaraugus County (Michael L. Nenno, A.J.), entered July 23, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from, upon reargument, denied in part the motion of defendant Richard Bernstein seeking summary judgment.
Now, upon the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on August 26, 2016, and filed in the Cattaraugus County Clerk’s Office on September 29, 2016,
It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.
Present—Whalen, P.J., Centra, Carni, Curran and Troutman, JJ.