RODRIGUEZ v. HERBERT (2006)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Felipe RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeanette J. HERBERT, et al., Defendants-Respondents.

Decided: November 21, 2006

TOM, J.P., ANDRIAS, SAXE, GONZALEZ, SWEENY, JJ.

Robert W. Abrams, New York, for appellant. McCabe, Collins, McGeough & Fowler, LLP, Carle Place (Steven Morgenlender of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered August 24, 2005, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Even though the time plaintiff spent under treatment by different physicians after his accident exceeds 90 days, he failed to establish, by competent medical evidence, that during this period he was prevented from performing substantially all of the material acts constituting his customary daily activities during at least 90 of the first 180 days following the accident (Insurance Law § 5102[d]; see Thompson v. Abbasi, 15 A.D.3d 95, 100-101, 788 N.Y.S.2d 48 [2005] ). Plaintiff's deposition testimony excerpts are insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network