Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989

Stadier v. Findley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 20, 1989

148 A.D.2d 600; 539 N.Y.S.2d 65; 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3886

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Pecora v. Lawrence (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Decaires v. Love (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
Baldasty v. Cooper (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
Brown v. Bussey (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
Dazco Heating & Air Conditioning Corp. v. C.B.C. Industries, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
Braham v. U-Haul Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
Craft v. Brantuk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
Gleason v. Huber (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
Tringali v. County of Suffolk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hand, J.), dated February 16, 1988, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, her deposition testimony to the effect that she suffers intermittent pain in the shoulder and neck as a result of the accident, in conjunction with a previous medical diagnosis of "cervical radiculitis”, is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of serious injury which requires a showing that she suffered permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member (see, Insurance Law § 5102 [d]; Scheer v Koubek, 70 NY2d 678; Popp v Kremer, 124 AD2d 720; cf., Mooney v Ovitt, 100 AD2d 702). Thus, the defendants are entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Brown, J. P., Eiber, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.