In a lawsuit arising out of a 2022 motor vehicle accident, defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting that plaintiff did not satisfy the serious injury requirement of Insurance Law § 5104(a). While defendants made out a prima facie case in support of their summary judgment motion through their doctor’s affirmed report and by noting that plaintiff missed only three weeks of work, plaintiff’s treating doctor affirmed to two examinations yielding reduced ranges of motion. Plaintiff demonstrated material issues of fact regarding permanent consequential limitation and significant limitation sufficient to warrant denial of defendants’ motion.
Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Aaron Maslow noted, however, that in reviewing the bill of particulars, it had to consider all nine categories of serious injury plaintiff had claimed, which included death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, fracture, and loss of fetus.
