AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

CATHERINE DAN et al., Appellants, v. NOEL A. LUKE et al., Respondents.

The court properly granted summary judgment to defendants, who predicated their motion upon, inter alia, Plaintiff's bill of particulars and various X-ray, MRI and other reports prepared and signed by Plaintiff's treating physicians ( see, Deangelo v Marcia Serv. Corp., 199 AD2d 58). These submissions established that there is no merit to Plaintiff's claim of "serious injury" within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955; Lopez v Senatore, 65 NY2d 1017). Moreover, the court properly determined that Plaintiff's letter and a report prepared by two of Plaintiff's treating physicians were inadmissible because they were unsworn and had not been affirmed ( see, CPLR 2106; McLoyrd v Pennypacker, 178 AD2d 227, lv denied 79 NY2d 754). In any event, these documents do not demonstrate that plaintiff suffered a "serious injury" within the meaning of section 5102 (d).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DAN v. LUKE
(Mar 18, 1997)