Legal Opinion

Byrnes v. Hertz Corp.

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

Decided December 27, 2000PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for injuries allegedly sustained by Sheila M. Byrnes (plaintiff) in an automobile accident. Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). With respect to plaintiffs’ allegation that plaintiff suffered a serious injury under the “90-out-of-180-day rule” (Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gaddy v. EylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. Licari v. ElliottNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Ayotte v. GervasioNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Thomas v. HulslanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  5. Borino v. LittleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Yoonessi v. GivensAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API