The case Perl v. Meher,1 decided by the Court of Appeals on Nov. 22, 2011, is a trilogy of automobile accident personal injury cases out of the First and Second Departments addressing the vexing application of the serious injury threshold under the New York State Insurance Law in a litigation realm replete with fraudulent and frivolous claims.
The Appellate Division in each case rejected allegations of serious injury as a matter of law. The Court of Appeals in Perl reversed two of these decisions: the lead case, Perl v. Meher2 (on a summary judgment motion), and Adler v. Bayer3 (on a CPLR 4401 motion for JMOL), both out of the Second Department; and affirmed the third case: Travis v. Batchi4 (summary judgment), from the First Department. The plaintiffs in all three cases relied on the two “limitation of use” categories of the statutory definition—categories that in substance require some significant, permanent impairment.5
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
