From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gonazlez v. Beale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 15, 2007
37 A.D.3d 278 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 234.

February 15, 2007.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered December 28, 2005, dismissing the complaint pursuant to an order, same court and Justice, entered November 7, 2005, which, inter alia, granted defendants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Pagan Law Firm, P.C., New York (Priyanka G. Menon of counsel), for appellant.

Reardon Sclafani, P.C., Tarrytown (Michael V. Sclafani of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Sweeny and Kavanagh, JJ.


Plaintiff's evidence in response to defendants' prima facie showing that the subject February 2001 accident did not cause a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) consisted mainly of his chiropractor's June 2005 affidavit and accompanying report of a May 2005 examination, both prepared after defendants had cross-moved for summary judgment. The chiropractor had last seen plaintiff approximately seven months after the accident, and was the only health care professional to see plaintiff after he had completed a three-month course of physical therapy, chiropractic manipulation and acupuncture. While the chiropractor, who opines that plaintiff suffers from permanent and partially disabling limitations to his lumbar and cervical spine attributable to multiple disc herniations with stenosis, as well numbness in his hand attributable to carpal tunnel syndrome, states that he had released plaintiff from active chiropractic care because he believed his conditions were permanent and that any further treatment would be palliative only, and that plaintiff has since been suffering and self-treating with various medications, mostly Motrin, he does not satisfactorily explain the four-year gap in treatment for purportedly painful conditions ( see Pommells v Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 574 [2005]; Navedo v Jaime, 32 AD3d 788, 790).


Summaries of

Gonazlez v. Beale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 15, 2007
37 A.D.3d 278 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Gonazlez v. Beale

Case Details

Full title:ANGEL GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. MOTE A BEALE et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Feb 15, 2007

Citations

37 A.D.3d 278 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 1363
830 N.Y.S.2d 95

Citing Cases

Courchevel 1850 LLC v. Rodriguez

The rule that non-mortgagor defendants be joined "derives from the underlying objective of foreclosure…

Assets Recovery 23, LLC v. Gasper

The rule that non-mortgagor defendants be joined "derives from the underlying objective of foreclosure…