Legal Opinion

Scheer v. Koubek

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 7, 1987PublishedCited by 157 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed.

Plaintiff has failed to make out her prima facie case of "serious injury” by "significant limitation of use of a body function or system” (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Plaintiff’s proof that she suffered a soft tissue injury, described by her own expert as "mild,” and which, at the time of trial, resulted in no restriction of plaintiff’s mobility, is not a "serious injury” under the No-Fault Insurance Law. We reject the holding of the majority of the Third Department…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Licari v. ElliottNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  2. Thrall v. City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Thrall v. City of SyracuseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983

3Cited by157 opinions

  1. Toure v. Avis Rent a Car Systems, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
  2. Gaddy v. EylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Oswin v. ShawSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
  4. Beckett v. ConteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  5. Daliendo v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

152 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API