Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Devendra Chatoorang v. G.C. Navarrete-Duque

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


April 11, 2013

DEVENDRA CHATOORANG,
PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
G.C. NAVARRETE-DUQUE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Chatoorang v Navarrete-Duque

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on April 11, 2013

Andrias, J.P., Moskowitz, Freedman, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered February 7, 2012, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Defendant failed to establish that plaintiff's claimed dental injury, consisting of a fracture of a front tooth, was not caused by the accident or did not constitute a serious injury within the "fracture" category of Insurance Law § 5102(d) (see Newman v Datta, 72 AD3d 537 [1st Dept 2010]). In any event, in opposition to the motion, plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact. Plaintiff submitted an affirmation of his dentist averring that plaintiff underwent dental treatment for his fractured central incisors, that the fracture was causally related to the accident, and that he would be required to undergo ongoing dental treatment (see Newman at 537; Kennedy v Anthony, 195 AD2d 942 [3d Dept 1993]).

In view of the foregoing finding that the injuries to plaintiff's teeth meet the no-fault threshold, "it is unnecessary to address whether his proof with respect to other injuries he allegedly sustained would have been sufficient to withstand defendant's motion for summary judgment" (Linton v Nawaz, 14 NY3d 821, 822 [2010]; Rubin v SMS Taxi Corp., 71 AD3d 548, 549-550 [1st Dept 2010]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: APRIL 11, 2013

CLERK

20130411

© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.