Case Name: Christine Uveges, Respondent, v. Richard Crill et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-03-30
Citations: 137 A.D.3d 1262
Docket Number: 
Parties: Christine Uveges, Respondent, v Richard Crill et al., Appellants.
Judges: Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 137
Pages: 1262–1263

Head Matter:
Christine Uveges, Respondent, v Richard Crill et al., Appellants.
[27 NYS3d 388]

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Sciortino, J.), dated January 7, 2015, which, in effect, denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants established, prima facie, 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 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). In opposition, however, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact (see Perl v Meher, 18 NY3d 208, 218-219 [2011]; Compass v GAE Transp., Inc., 79 AD3d 1091, 1092 [2010]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly, in effect, denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.