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.
ANTHONY P. FANTI AND DEBORAH FANTI, PLAINTIFFS–RESPONDENTS, v. JUAN CONCEPCION AND DARLENE CAMACHO, DEFENDANTS–APPELLANTS.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted and the complaint against defendants-appellants is dismissed.
Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action seeking damages for injuries allegedly sustained by Anthony P. Fanti (plaintiff) in May 2007 when the vehicle he was driving was struck from behind by a vehicle owned by Juan Concepcion and driven by Darlene Camacho (defendants). In October 2007 plaintiff was involved in a virtually identical rear-end collision, and plaintiffs commenced a separate action against the owner and driver of the vehicle that struck plaintiff's vehicle in that accident. This Court previously modified the instant order in a prior appeal taken by those defendants therefrom (Fanti v. McLaren, 110 AD3d 1493).
We conclude that Supreme Court erred in denying defendants' motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) in the May 2007 accident. Plaintiffs have conceded that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury as the result of the first accident, but they contend that defendants are nevertheless liable for the injuries sustained in the second accident. We reject that contention. “Defendants are not liable for injuries sustained in the second accident that are distinguishable from the injuries sustained in the first accident” (Owens v. Nolan, 269 A.D.2d 794, 795; cf. Daliendo v. Johnson, 147 A.D.2d 312, 313).
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
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: CA 13–01371
Decided: March 28, 2014
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)