From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bracco v. Zuhir

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 10, 2014
123 A.D.3d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-12-10

Regina Russo BRACCO, respondent, v. Ghazal ZUHIR, appellant, et al., defendant.

Ryan & Conlon, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Elizabeth E. Malang of counsel), for appellant. Frekhtman & Associates, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Arkady Frekhtman and Stephen J. Smith of counsel), for respondent.


Ryan & Conlon, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Elizabeth E. Malang of counsel), for appellant. Frekhtman & Associates, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Arkady Frekhtman and Stephen J. Smith of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Ghazal Zuhir appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Partnow, J.), dated January 22, 2013, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant met his prima facie burden of establishing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345, 746 N.Y.S.2d 865, 774 N.E.2d 1197; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 956–957, 582 N.Y.S.2d 990, 591 N.E.2d 1176). In opposition, however, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact, inter alia, as to whether she suffered a medically determined injury or impairment of a nonpermanent nature which prevented her from performing substantially all of her customary and usual daily activities during at least 90 out of the first 180 days following the subject accident ( see Manzanares v. Aliev, 62 A.D.3d 963, 964, 878 N.Y.S.2d 907; Valdes v. Fang Yun Hu, 307 A.D.2d 1033, 763 N.Y.S.2d 755).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident. MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN and BARROS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bracco v. Zuhir

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 10, 2014
123 A.D.3d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Bracco v. Zuhir

Case Details

Full title:Regina Russo BRACCO, respondent, v. Ghazal ZUHIR, appellant, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 10, 2014

Citations

123 A.D.3d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8594
996 N.Y.S.2d 540

Citing Cases

Pena v. Diallo

(See Defendant's Motion, Exhibit A, Pages 49, 58, 59). See Bracco v. Zuhir, 123 A.D.3d 753, 996 N.Y.S.2d 540…

Paneto v. Clause

Plaintiff further testified to difficulty in doing normal household chores such as laundry as well as…