Alam v Uber Technologies, Inc.
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Motor vehicle personal injury litigation involving New York's no-fault serious injury threshold.
The Supreme Court, Queens County, granted the defendant Adlet Ilyassov's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint against him, finding that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d) [defines the serious injury threshold for recovery in motor vehicle accident cases].
The Appellate Division reversed the order granting summary judgment to Ilyassov.
Although the defendant made a prima facie showing on the serious injury issue, the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact as to injuries to the cervical and lumbar spine, left shoulder, and left knee. The defendant also failed to establish, prima facie, that those injuries were not caused by the accident, so the burden never shifted to the plaintiff to explain any treatment gap.
Background
The plaintiff sought damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Defendant Adlet Ilyassov moved for summary judgment contending that the plaintiff did not suffer a statutorily serious injury caused by the accident.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Queens County, granted Ilyassov's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division reversed and denied the motion. It held that the plaintiff's opposition evidence created triable issues of fact under the permanent consequential limitation of use and significant limitation of use categories with respect to the cervical and lumbar spine, left shoulder, and left knee. It further held that the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that those claimed injuries were unrelated to the accident.
Legal Significance
The decision reinforces that, in serious injury threshold cases, a defendant seeking summary judgment must not only address the existence of qualifying limitations but also adequately negate causation where causation is disputed. If the defendant fails to establish lack of causation as part of the prima facie case, the plaintiff is not required to explain gaps in treatment.
A defendant can lose summary judgment on New York's serious injury threshold even after making part of a prima facie showing if the motion papers do not also establish that the claimed injuries were not caused by the accident.