Legal Opinion

DeSimone v. Royal GM, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 4, 2008PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By failing to move for a directed verdict pursuant to CPLR 4401 on the issue of whether the plaintiff sustained a “serious injury” under Insurance Law § 5102 (d), the defendants implicitly conceded that the issue was for the trier of fact (see *491Miller v Miller, 68 NY2d 871, 873 [1986]; Hurley v Cavitolo, 239 AD2d 559 [1997]). Furthermore, the jury verdict finding, inter alia, that the plaintiff sustained a “significant limitation of use of a body function or system” should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence, as it could have been reached on a fair interpretation of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Miller v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Bendersky v. M & O Enterprises Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  3. Hurley v. CavitoloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  4. Severin v. BenenatiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Konfidan v. FF Taxi, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. Weathers v. RiosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  3. Houston v. KoszerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
  4. Kalmeta v. PoelkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API