Lumpkins v. Kendrick
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment and order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendants’ motion for judgment at the close of plaintiffs proof on the ground that plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). With respect to his allegation that he sustained a significant limitation of use of a body function or system, plaintiff failed to support his subjective claims of pain and limitation of motion with the requisite objective medical findings (see, Taber v Skulicz, 265 AD2d 902; Stowell v Safee, 251…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stowell v. SafeeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Taber v. SkuliczAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
3Cited by3 opinions
- Calucci v. BakerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Omar v. GoodmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Nitti v. ClerricoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002