From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Einhorn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 1986
123 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

October 20, 1986

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant moved for summary judgment on the ground that the plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law former § 671 (4) (now § 5102 [d]). The plaintiff's papers submitted in opposition to the motion, including an affidavit of his treating physician, indicating a limitation of his back movement to 70% of normal, were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact and defeat the motion (see, Lopez v Senatore, 65 N.Y.2d 1017). Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Perez v. Einhorn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 1986
123 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Perez v. Einhorn

Case Details

Full title:ENRIQUE R. PEREZ, Respondent, v. ALAN J. EINHORN, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1986

Citations

123 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Ragabear v. Lallmahamad

Since no description of her present physical condition, limitation of her range of motion, or course of…

Pacchiano v. Dilauro

We agree. The plaintiff does not seriously argue that she suffered a permanent consequential limitation of a…