Case Name: Eleana Rose, Respondent, v. City of New Rochelle, Respondent, and Joe G. Metzger et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2008-12-02
Citations: 57 A.D.3d 506
Docket Number: 
Parties: Eleana Rose, Respondent, v City of New Rochelle, Respondent, and Joe G. Metzger et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 57
Pages: 506–507

Head Matter:
Eleana Rose, Respondent, v City of New Rochelle, Respondent, and Joe G. Metzger et al., Appellants.
[867 NYS2d 696]

Opinion:
The appellants' proof failed to eliminate all issues of fact as to whether, as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident, the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and thus failed to make a prima facie showing that the appellants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Under these circumstances, it is not necessary to consider the sufficiency of the plaintiffs opposition papers (see Tchjevskaia v Chase, 15 AD3d 389 [2005]). Santucci, J.E, Covello, Leventhal and Belen, JJ., concur.