By notice of motion filed on June 24, 2010, defendant moves under motion sequence three, for an order dismissing plaintiff’s complaint, pursuant to CPLR § 3212, on the basis that plaintiff’s injuries do not satisfy the “serious injury” requirement of New York Insurance Law § 5102(d). Plaintiff opposes defendant’s motion. Co-defendant did not appear or oppose the defendant’s motion. On September 22, 2008, plaintiff filed a summons and verified complaint with the Kings County Clerk’s Office. By verified answer, dated December 5, 2008, defendant joined issue. On April 29, 2010, a note of issue was filed.
A Kings Car Accident Lawyer said that, plaintiff’s action is for damages due to personal injury sustained as a result of a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff’s complaint and bill of particulars alleges that on September 27, 2005, she was a passenger in a 1997 Lincoln Town Car owned and operated by co-defendant when said vehicle collided with a 2000 Acura owned and operated by defendant at the intersection of 58th Street and 6th Avenue in the County of Kings. Plaintiff alleges to have sustained severe physical injury as a result of the defendant’s negligent operation of their vehicles.
A Kings Motorcycle Accident Lawyer said that, defendant’s motion papers consist of a notice of motion, an attorney’s affirmation and seven exhibits, labeled A through G. Exhibit A is an “e-law” document containing details of the instant case. Exhibit B is the plaintiff’s summons and verified complaint. Exhibit C is the defendant’s verified answer. Exhibit D is the plaintiff’s verified bill of particulars. Exhibit E is the affirmed report of neurologist. Exhibit F is the affirmed report of orthopedic surgeon Exhibit G is the affirmed report of radiologist.
Plaintiff in opposition, has submitted an attorney’s affirmation, an affidavit of merit and five exhibits labeled A through E. Exhibit A includes medical records from Lutheran Medical Center. Exhibit B includes medical records from Seaview Medical & Rehabilitation. Exhibit C includes medical records from Al Correa, Neurologist, P.C. Exhibit D includes medical records from Complete Care, including the affirmation of the neurologist. Exhibit E includes medical records from Doshi Diagnostic.
The issue in this case is whether plaintiff incurred serious injury under the Insurance Law.
It is well established that summary judgment may be granted only when it is clear that no triable issue of fact exists. The burden is upon the moving party to make a prima facie showing that he or she is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law by presenting evidence in admissible form demonstrating the absence of material facts. A failure to make that showing requires the denial of the summary judgment motion, regardless of the adequacy of the opposing papers. If a prima facie showing has been made, the burden shifts to the opposing party to produce evidentiary proof sufficient to establish the existence of material issues of fact.
In order to prove serious injury sustained in a car accident, seek the representation of a Kings Car Accident Attorney and Kings Personal Injury Attorney at Stephen Bilkis and Associates.