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.
Raymond RUFFINO, respondent, v. Richard D. GREEN, et al., appellants, et al., defendant.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Richard D. Green and DMGT Telecommunications, Inc., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Woodard, J.), dated May 30, 2007, which 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 affirmed, with costs.
The appellants failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) (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; Newberger v. Hirsch, 49 A.D.3d 700, 853 N.Y.S.2d 635; Page v. Belmonte, 45 A.D.3d 825, 846 N.Y.S.2d 351; Tchjevskaia v. Chase, 15 A.D.3d 389, 790 N.Y.S.2d 175). The report prepared by Dr. Adam Silvers regarding a magnetic resonance imaging of the plaintiff's lumbar spine taken approximately one month after the accident, which the appellants submitted in support of their motion, raised a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572) as to whether the plaintiff sustained a fracture in the subject motor vehicle accident (see Insurance Law § 5102[d] ). Under these circumstances, it is unnecessary to consider the sufficiency of the plaintiff's opposition papers (see Tchjevskaia v. Chase, 15 A.D.3d at 389, 790 N.Y.S.2d 175).
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 09, 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)