CECELIA COLEY, plf-ap, v. ONRIS R. DELAROSA def-res, OSCAR B. MARTINEZ def

8109. CECELIA COLEY, plf-ap, v. ONRIS R. DELAROSA def-res, OSCAR B. MARTINEZ def — Law Offices of Eric H. Green & Associates, New York (Marc Gertler of counsel), for ap — Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey & Moskovits, P.C., Brooklyn (Stacy R. Seldin of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered June 15, 2011, which granted defendants motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law §5102(d), reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motions denied.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

8109. CECELIA COLEY, plf-ap, v. ONRIS R. DELAROSA def-res, OSCAR B. MARTINEZ def — Law Offices of Eric H. Green & Associates, New York (Marc Gertler of counsel), for ap — Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey & Moskovits, P.C., Brooklyn (Stacy R. Seldin of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered June 15, 2011, which granted defendants motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law §5102(d), reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motions denied.

Defendants made a prima facie showing that plaintiff did not suffer from a permanent or significant limitation as a result of the accident. They submitted the affirmed report of an orthopedist, who opined that plaintiff’s left wrist and lumbar spine injuries were degenerative and not caused by the accident. In reaching these conclusions, the orthopedist indicated that he reviewed the operative report for surgery performed on plaintiff’s left wrist less than four months after the accident and found that it describes a “complex tear of the fibro-cartilage” and that such tears “are due to chronic degeneration.” As to the lumbar spine, the orthopedist, inter alia, pointed to a report of an MRI taken 17 days after the accident that failed to reveal any nerve root impingement, which he believed meant there was no basis on which to attribute plaintiff’s alleged lumbar spine injuries to the accident. Defendants also submitted affirmed radiologist reports, based upon review of three MRIs, all taken within three weeks of the accident, that no traumatic injury had been sustained to the left shoulder, left wrist or lumbar spine (see Barry v. Arias, 94 AD3d 499 [1st Dept 2012]; Paulino v. Rodriguez, 91 AD3d 559 [1st Dept 2012]).

CECELIA COLEY, plf-ap, v. ONRIS R. DELAROSA def-res, OSCAR B. MARTINEZ def

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal