From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Burke McCowen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 2004
7 A.D.3d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-07426, 2003-11438.

Decided May 17, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered June 25, 2003, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d), and (2), as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the same court entered December 10, 2003, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, and as denied that branch of her motion which was for leave to renew.

Steven Wildstein, P.C., Great Neck, N.Y., for appellant.

Susan B. Owens, White Plains, N.Y. (Paul L. Neugebauer of counsel), for respondents.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered June 25, 2003, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by so much of the order entered December 10, 2003, as was made upon reargument; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order dated December 10, 2003, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants.

The defendants made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The affirmations of the plaintiff's physicians were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. It is well settled that subjective complaints of pain and limitation of motion must be substantiated by verified objective medical findings ( see Kauderer v. Penta, 261 A.D.2d 365; Carroll v. Jennings, 264 A.D.2d 494).

Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Johnson v. Burke McCowen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 2004
7 A.D.3d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Johnson v. Burke McCowen

Case Details

Full title:JOSETTE JOHNSON, appellant, v. BURKE McCOWEN, ET AL., respondents

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

Date published: May 17, 2004

Citations

7 A.D.3d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
776 N.Y.S.2d 829

Citing Cases

Murray v. Hartford

The affidavit was based upon examinations conducted nearly four years prior to the date of the affidavit (…

Kane v. State

A "plat" is defined in 32 Wd. Phr. (Perm. ed.) p. 630, as — "a subdivision of land into lots, streets, and…