From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jorge v. Sutton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 30, 1987
128 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

March 30, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hyman, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Although in the first instance the plaintiff must establish, prima facie, the existence of a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), the defendant movants, in seeking the drastic remedy of summary judgment, have the burden of tendering sufficient evidence in admissible form to show that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law (Brown v. Visan Fuel Oil Co., 114 A.D.2d 396; Merlis v. Lupo, 108 A.D.2d 902). On this record, we conclude that the defendants did not sustain their burden. In the posture of this case, accepting as true the evidence favoring the plaintiff, we find that the plaintiff's claim of a serious injury within the meaning of the Insurance Law presents a question of fact to be resolved by the jury. Brown, J.P., Niehoff, Eiber and Sullivan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Jorge v. Sutton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 30, 1987
128 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Jorge v. Sutton

Case Details

Full title:YOUSSEF JORGE, Respondent, v. JAMES J. SUTTON et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Mar 30, 1987

Citations

128 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Jorge v. Sutton

The plaintiff, however, failed to inform the court as well as the defendants that he had become a signatory…