General
Eduard Dron, Respondent, v. Emanuel Beitscher, Appellant
269 A.D.2d 557703 N.Y.S.2d 752·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2000·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Eduard Dron, Respondent, v Emanuel Beitscher, Appellant.
[703 NYS2d 752]
[MAJORITY]
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated February 5, 1999, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
There is an issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Belmonte v Collins, 261 AD2d 496; Mariaca-Olmos v Mizrhy, 226 AD2d 437). Bracken, J. P., Joy, Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.