Case Name: Angel Barroso, Appellant, v. Gilma S. Kristensen et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2007-12-18
Citations: 46 A.D.3d 731
Docket Number: 
Parties: Angel Barroso, Appellant, v Gilma S. Kristensen et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 46
Pages: 731–731

Head Matter:
Angel Barroso, Appellant, v Gilma S. Kristensen et al., Respondents.
[847 NYS2d 482]

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hart, J.), dated September 7, 2006, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that he did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants met their prima facie burden by establishing 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, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Spolzino, J.P., Skelos, Lifson and McCarthy, JJ., concur.