Townes v. Harlem Group, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Supreme Court properly determined that appellants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment as to plaintiffs claims of “significant limitation of use” of his cervical spine, lumbar spine, and right knee (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Appellants submitted competent and objective medical evidence that plaintiff did not suffer a loss of range of motion as to any of those organs or systems (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345, 350 [2002]). Appellants also submitted sufficient evidence that plaintiffs conditions were degenerative or age-related, which shifted the burden…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Toure v. Avis Rent a Car Systems, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Pommells v. PerezNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
- Dufel v. GreenNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Thompson v. AbbasiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Wadford v. GruzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Vasquez v. AlmanzarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Vega v. MTA Bus Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- James v. PerezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Pastabar Café Corp. v. 343 East 8th Street Associates, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Mirdita v. Ash Leasing Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.