Lyndor v Cezario
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
New York no-fault motor vehicle litigation: whether plaintiff met the 'serious injury' threshold under Insurance Law § 5102(d) [defines the categories of 'serious injury' that a plaintiff must prove to recover non-economic damages outside the no-fault system, including permanent consequential and significant limitation categories and the 90/180-day category].
The Supreme Court, Nassau County granted summary judgment to the defendants and third-party defendant, dismissing the complaint for failure to show a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d).
The order granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint in favor of the defendants and third-party defendant.
Although the movants made a prima facie showing, plaintiff’s opposition raised triable issues of fact as to permanent consequential and significant limitations to the left shoulder, left knee, and cervical and lumbar spine, and as to causation; the movants also failed to eliminate triable issues on the 90/180-day category.
Background
Plaintiff Charline Lyndor alleged personal injuries from a motor vehicle accident, including injuries to her left shoulder, left knee, and cervical and lumbar spine. Defendants John F. Cezario and JFC Construction, Inc., and third-party defendant Marie C. St. Aime moved for summary judgment, arguing plaintiff did not sustain a qualifying 'serious injury' under Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Nassau County granted both motions and dismissed the complaint, holding plaintiff failed to establish a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Appellate Division Reversal
Reversed on the law. The Appellate Division held that while the movants met their prima facie burden, plaintiff’s submissions created triable issues of fact under the permanent consequential limitation and significant limitation categories, and on causation for the left shoulder, left knee, and cervical and lumbar spine. The movants also did not eliminate issues of fact on the 90/180-day category. The motions for summary judgment were therefore denied.
Legal Significance
Reaffirms that in no-fault cases under Insurance Law § 5102(d), defendants must negate all pleaded serious-injury categories, including the 90/180-day category, to obtain summary judgment. Plaintiffs can defeat summary judgment with admissible medical evidence creating triable issues on objective limitations and causation, even where defendants have made a prima facie showing.
On a serious-injury threshold motion, defendants must address every claimed category and submit proof eliminating triable issues; plaintiffs can defeat dismissal by offering competent, objective medical evidence of limitations and causation, including for the 90/180-day category.