Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Victor CELESTINE, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Brianna BONTE et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered on or about August 1, 2023, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the motion of defendants Brianna Bonte and Empress Ambulance Service LLC for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claims on the ground that he did not meet the serious injury threshold of Insurance Law § 5102(d) to the extent of dismissing plaintiff's claims alleging serious injury to his right elbow and right ankle and his 90/180-day claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendants do not appeal from that part of the order denying their motion seeking to dismiss plaintiff's claims that he sustained serious injuries to his cervical spine, lumbar spine, right knee, and right shoulder. It is well settled that if a jury determines that the plaintiff has met the threshold for serious injury for any of his injuries, then it may award him damages for all injuries causally related to the accident, including those that do not meet the serious injury threshold, like the claimed injuries to his right elbow and right ankle (see Morales v. Cabral, 177 A.D.3d 556, 558, 113 N.Y.S.3d 684 [1st Dept. 2019]; Rubin v. SMS Taxi Corp., 71 A.D.3d 548, 549, 898 N.Y.S.2d 110 [1st Dept. 2010]). Contrary to defendants' contention on appeal, there has been no finding that the claimed right elbow and right ankle injuries were not causally related to the accident. Accordingly, the order appealed from does not preclude plaintiff from presenting evidence of the injuries sustained to his elbow and ankle at trial.
The court properly dismissed plaintiff's 90/180-day claim based on his deposition testimony that he was not advised by any of his treating medical providers to refrain from returning to work and in fact did return to work five weeks after the accident (see Rivera v. Lopez–Reyes, 203 A.D.3d 554, 555, 162 N.Y.S.3d 697 [1st Dept. 2022]; Blake v. Cadet, 175 A.D.3d 1199, 1200, 109 N.Y.S.3d 266 [1st Dept. 2019]).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2955
Decided: October 31, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)