Ottavio v. Moore
| Decision Date | 27 June 1988 |
| Citation | 529 N.Y.S.2d 876,141 A.D.2d 806 |
| Parties | Annett OTTAVIO, Appellant, v. David MOORE, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Cooperstein, Beck & Rubin, P.C., Garden City (Leland Stuart Beck, of counsel, Anthony J. Licatesi, on the brief), for appellant.
Stern & Altimari, Mineola (Anthony F. Altimari and Robert Charles Wirth, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BROWN, J.P., and KUNZEMAN, RUBIN and KOOPER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), dated September 14, 1987, which, upon granting the defendant's motion to set aside a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the principal sum of $75,000 on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to prove that she had suffered a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102, dismissed the complaint.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the jury verdict is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for the entry of an appropriate judgment.
The plaintiff instituted this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained in an automobile accident when the defendant negligently made a U-turn. On impact, the plaintiff's car was spun around. The plaintiff did not immediately sustain any manifest physical injuries and was not taken to the hospital. She saw her family physician the next day, was given some pain killers and bed rest was recommended. Thereafter, the plaintiff continued treatment for neck and lower back pain with a chiropractic orthopedist. X-rays showed that the plaintiff had sustained subluxations or misalignments of the spine. The chiropractic orthopedist was of the opinion that this condition would be permanent and would cause occasional pain to the plaintiff. Even though the plaintiff returned to her normal work schedule as a special services representative for an airline one month after the accident, she could not partake in athletic activities she previously enjoyed.
The jury found that the plaintiff had sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 and awarded her $75,000. Upon motion by the defendant, the trial court set aside the jury verdict and dismissed the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of serious injury within the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hodder v. U.S., 01 CV 8086(CLP).
...where the report relies on objective evidence such as x-rays or range of motion tests, see id. (citing Ottavio v. Moore, 141 A.D.2d 806, 807, 529 N.Y.S.2d 876, 877 (2d Dep't 1988) (mem.) (finding sufficient a chiropractor's report based on an x-ray), appeal denied, 73 N.Y.2d 704, 534 N.E.2d......
-
Williams v. Ritchie
...proof of "persistent pain, or operation of the organ, member or system in some limited way, or only with pain." Ottavio v. Moore, 141 A.D.2d 806, 529 N.Y.S.2d 876 (2d Dep't 1988) (citing Bassett v. Romano, 126 A.D.2d 693, 511 N.Y.S.2d 298 (2d Dep't 1987)). "Although permanent pain, even of ......
-
Rivera v. United States
...held that permanency can refer to pain that has a limiting effect on plaintiff's abilities. See, e.g., Ottavio v. Moore, 141 A.D.2d 806, 807, 529 N.Y.S.2d 876, 877 (2d Dep't 1988) (citing cases) ("We have also held that permanency of an injury could refer to persistent pain, or operation of......
-
Cabarris v. Knight Transp., Inc.
...refer to persistent pain, or operation of the organ, member or system in some limited way, or only with pain." Ottavio v. Moore, 141 A.D.2d 806, 807 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 1988), appeal denied 73 N.Y.2d 704 (1989). "In order to prove the extent or degree of physical limitation, an expert'......
-
Chapter Twenty-Four
.... Scheer, 70 N.Y.2d at 679. [3136] . Gleissner v. LoPresti, 135 A.D.2d 494, 521 N.Y.S.2d 735 (2d Dep’t 1987); Ottavio v. Moore, 141 A.D.2d 806, 807, 529 N.Y.S.2d 876 (2d Dep’t 1988) (“It is well settled that pain can form the basis of a serious injury. Whether it does is a question of fact ......