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.
Elira GOVORI, respondent, v. AGATE CORP., et al., appellants, et al., defendants.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Agate Corp. and Carboni Benjamin appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Saitta, J.), dated February 8, 2007, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion of the defendants Agate Corp. and Carboni Benjamin for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them is granted.
The defendants Agate Corp. and Carboni Benjamin established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating, through the affirmations of their medical experts and the deposition testimony of the plaintiff, that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345, 746 N.Y.S.2d 865, 774 N.E.2d 1197; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 582 N.Y.S.2d 990, 591 N.E.2d 1176; see also Meyers v. Bobower Yeshiva Bnei Zion, 20 A.D.3d 456, 797 N.Y.S.2d 773).
In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The plaintiff's hospital records and magnetic resonance imaging reports were without probative value since they were neither affirmed nor certified (see Rodriguez v. Cesar, 40 A.D.3d 731, 732–732, 835 N.Y.S.2d 438; Mejia v. De Rose, 35 A.D.3d 407, 408, 825 N.Y.S.2d 722), the affirmation of the plaintiff's treating physician was without probative value since the conclusions were reached in reliance upon the unsworn reports of others (see Furrs v. Griffith, 43 A.D.3d 389, 390, 841 N.Y.S.2d 594; Phillips v. Zilinsky, 39 A.D.3d 728, 729, 834 N.Y.S.2d 299; Porto v. Blum, 39 A.D.3d 614, 615, 833 N.Y.S.2d 245), and the plaintiff's affidavit was insufficient to overcome these deficiencies (see Garcia v. Solbes, 41 A.D.3d 426, 427, 838 N.Y.S.2d 146; Fisher v. Williams, 289 A.D.2d 288, 289, 734 N.Y.S.2d 497).
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.
Decided: October 16, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)