From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pringle v. Roussan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 2005
23 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2004-09587.

November 28, 2005.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated September 22, 2004, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Norman Volk Associates, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Michael I. Josephs of counsel), for appellant.

Ferro, Kuba, Mangano, Skylar, Gacovino Lake, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Michael N. Manolakis of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cozier, J.P., Luciano, Fisher and Covello, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In opposition to the defendant's motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff submitted evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see Agyeman v. Osei-Owusu, 15 AD3d 599).


Summaries of

Pringle v. Roussan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 2005
23 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Pringle v. Roussan

Case Details

Full title:NATHANIEL PRINGLE, Respondent, v. THEODORE ROUSSAN, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 28, 2005

Citations

23 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 9084
804 N.Y.S.2d 265