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.
Lori A. STEFKO, respondent, v. Murat ARSLAN, appellants.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Murat Arslan and Aleka Taxi, Inc., appeal, and the defendants Elfar Ahmed and Gymnastics Transit, Inc., separately appeal, from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated March 28, 2007, which denied their respective motions 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 affirmed, with one bill of costs.
On their motions for summary judgment, the defendants met their prima facie burdens by showing 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, 956-957, 582 N.Y.S.2d 990, 591 N.E.2d 1176). In opposition, the plaintiff, with her submissions, raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injury to her cervical and/or lumbar spine under the significant limitation of use category of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident (see Altreche v. Gilmar Masonry Corp., 49 A.D.3d 479, 853 N.Y.S.2d 371; Lim v. Tiburzi, 36 A.D.3d 671, 829 N.Y.S.2d 145; Shpakovskaya v. Etienne, 23 A.D.3d 368, 804 N.Y.S.2d 767; Clervoix v. Edwards, 10 A.D.3d 626, 781 N.Y.S.2d 690; Acosta v. Rubin, 2 A.D.3d 657, 768 N.Y.S.2d 642; Rosado v. Martinez, 289 A.D.2d 386, 734 N.Y.S.2d 622; Vitale v. Lev Express Cab Corp., 273 A.D.2d 225, 708 N.Y.S.2d 692).
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.
Decided: September 23, 2008
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)