Castano v. Synergy Gas Corp.
Opinion of the Court
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), dated May 6, 1997, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the injured plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The Supreme Court improperly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendants established a prima facie case that the injured plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury (see, Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957), thereby shifting the burden to the plaintiffs to raise a triable question of fact on that issue (see, Licari v Elliot, 57 NY2d 230, 235; Lopez v Senatore, 65 NY2d 1017). The plaintiffs failed to meet this burden.
The unsworn reports of the injured plaintiff’s treating physician and chiropractor should not be considered, as they were
Finally, the plaintiffs subjective complaints of pain, without evidence of an objective underlying injury, were insufficient to establish a serious injury, as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see, Scheer v Koubek, 70 NY2d 678; Iglesias v Inland Freightways, 209 AD2d 479, 480). Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.