Asiedu v. Lieberman

• Decision Date: 22 September 2016
• Citation: 142 A.D.3d 858,2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 06115,37 N.Y.S.3d 709 (Mem)
• Parties: Nana ASIEDU, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Marilyn LIEBERMAN, Defendant–Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

142 A.D.3d 858

37 N.Y.S.3d 709 (Mem)

2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 06115

Nana ASIEDU, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants,

v.Marilyn LIEBERMAN, Defendant–Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Sept. 22, 2016.

The Greenberg Law Firm, LLP, Purchase (Rebecca Greenberg of counsel), for appellants.

Adams, Hanson, Rego & Kaplan, Yonkers (Howard J. Kaplan of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered July 1, 2015, which granted defendant's amended cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint of plaintiff Rosemary Asiedu for failure to satisfy the serious injury threshold under Insurance Law § 5102(d), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the amended cross motion denied. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered October 29, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs' motion to renew defendant's amended cross motion, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic in view of the foregoing.

Defendant's mislabeled cross motion, in response to plaintiff Nana Asiedu's motion for summary judgment, was “an improper vehicle for seeking affirmative relief from [plaintiff Rosemary Asiedu,] a nonmoving party” (Mango v. Long Is. Jewish–Hillside Med. Ctr., 123 A.D.2d 843, 844, 507 N.Y.S.2d 456 [2d Dept.1986] ; see also Kershaw v. Hospital for Special Surgery, 114 A.D.3d 75, 88, 978 N.Y.S.2d 13 [1st Dept.2013] ).

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach plaintiffs' remaining contentions.

SWEENY, J.P., ACOSTA, FEINMAN, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ., concur.