From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baez v. Rahamatali

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 4, 2006
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3473 (N.Y. 2006)

Opinion

102 SSM 7.

Decided May 4, 2006.

APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered December 22, 2005. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), which had granted defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Baez v. Rahamatali, 24 AD3d 256, affirmed.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac De Cicco, New York City ( Brian J. Isaac of counsel), and Corpina, Piergrossi, Overzat Klar, LLP, for appellant. Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey Moskovits, P.C., New York City ( Holly E. Peck of counsel), for John Smith, respondent.

Morris Duffy Alonso Faley, New York City ( Yolanda L. Ayala of counsel), for Nestor Torres, respondent.

Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman Dicker LLP, New York City ( Nickolas G. Spiliotis of counsel), for Imamally Rahamatali, respondent.

Chief Judge KAYE and Judges G.B. SMITH, CIPARICK, ROSENBLATT, GRAFFEO, READ and R.S. SMITH concur.


OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Defendants met their initial burden of establishing that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). In opposition, plaintiff failed to provide an objective medical basis supporting the conclusion that she sustained a serious injury ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345, 350-351). Moreover, plaintiff failed to come forward with evidence that her current alleged need for surgery is causally related to the automobile accident ( see Pommells v. Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 572, 580). Summary judgment was therefore properly granted to defendants.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

Baez v. Rahamatali

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 4, 2006
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3473 (N.Y. 2006)
Case details for

Baez v. Rahamatali

Case Details

Full title:TAYNISHA BAEZ, Appellant, v. IMAMALLY RAHAMATALI et al., Respondents

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 4, 2006

Citations

2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3473 (N.Y. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3473
817 N.Y.S.2d 204
850 N.E.2d 19

Citing Cases

Lim v. Jilani

Consequently, defendant failed to meet his initial burden of making a prima facie showing that plaintiff…

Spence v. Mikelberg

He thus established his entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by…