Ramkumar v. Grand Style Transportation Enterprises Inc.

Saxe, J.E, and Freedman, J.,

dissent in a memorandum by Saxe, J.E, as follows: Although the motion court dismissed plaintiffs serious injury claims on the ground that his physi*486cian’s measurements of plaintiffs range-of-motion limitations were not made contemporaneously with the accident, the majority affirms the dismissal based on different reasoning, namely, what it deems to be an insufficiently-explained cessation of treatment. In view of plaintiffs assertion that he ceased ongoing therapy when his no-fault benefits for that service ceased, I believe it is error to affirm the dismissal of…