 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
MEMORANDUM INSURANCE LAW PLAINTIFF RESPONDENT COSTS DEFENDANT EVIDENCE INJURY PERMANENCY INJURIES JUDGE BILL PARTICULARS PERMANENT NATURE INSUFFICIENT DEFEAT PRIMA FACIE SHOWING INDIG FINKELSTEIN NY2D REVIEW SUBMISSIONS PURSUANT CHIEF JUDGE KAYE JUDGES SIMONS TITONE BELLACOSA SMITH LEVINE CIPARICK CONCUR |
ROBERT SCHULTZ, APPELLANT, ET AL., PLAINTIFF, v. KATHLEEN VON VOIGHT,
RESPONDENT.
86 N.Y.2d 865, 658 N.E.2d 1040, 635 N.Y.S.2d 167
October 26, 1995
2 No. 335 SSM 56 (1995 NY Int. 228)
Decided October 26, 1995
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Submitted by Perry Gary Fish, for Appellant.
Submitted by Richard J. Inzerillo, for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Defendant presented sufficient evidence to demonstrate plaintiff did
not sustain serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law
5102(d) as a matter of law. Plaintiff's evidence proffered in
opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment fails to
establish a triable issue of fact concerning the permanency of the
injuries alleged to constitute serious injury within the scope of
Insurance Law § 5102(d). Plaintiff's sole reliance upon allegations
contained in his pleadings and bill of particulars to establish the
permanent nature of his injuries is insufficient to defeat the prima
facie showing made by defendant (see, Indig v Finkelstein, 23 NY2d
728, 729).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, order
affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges
Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
