From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Palladino v. Antonelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 22, 2007
836 N.Y.S.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2006-02848.

May 22, 2007.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (McGuirk, J.), dated February 2, 2006, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff Maria Palladino did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Patrick S. Owen, Goshen, N.Y., for appellants.

Marc D. Orloff, P.C., Goshen, N.Y. (Steven A. Kimmel of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Schmidt, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Covello, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff Maria Palladino (hereinafter the injured plaintiff) did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident ( see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). The defendants' examining neurologist and examining orthopedist merely stated that the range of motion in the injured plaintiff's cervical spine was "full," without setting forth the objective test or tests performed to support their conclusion ( see McCrary v Street, 34 AD3d 768; Ilardo v New York City Tr. Auth., 28 AD3d 610; Kelly v Rehfeld, 26 AD3d 469; Nembhard v Delatorre, 16 AD3d 390; Black v Robinson, 305 AD2d 438). Since the defendants failed to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in the first instance, it is unnecessary to reach the question of whether the plaintiffs' papers were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Coscia v 938 Trading Corp., 283 AD2d 538).


Summaries of

Palladino v. Antonelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 22, 2007
836 N.Y.S.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Palladino v. Antonelli

Case Details

Full title:MARIA PALLADINO et al., Appellants, v. JOHN ANTONELLI et al., Respondents

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

Date published: May 22, 2007

Citations

836 N.Y.S.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
836 N.Y.S.2d 656
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 4460

Citing Cases

Giammanco v. Valerio

In the affirmed medical report of the examining orthopedist, he set forth lumbar spine range of motion…

Yamamoto v. Carled Cab Corp.

However, while it states that he found normal range of motion in the shoulders, Dr. Godsick's report fails to…