Eagan v Gingo

Holding The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d) because their experts did not adequately substantiate that the plaintiff’s limitations were voluntary. The plaintiff established a prima facie case of liability and lack of comparative negligence by proving her vehicle was stopped at a red light when struck in the rear.

The court’s words

The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the accident

2026 NY Slip Op 06417, at the official text

the plaintiff established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability by submitting, inter alia, the transcript of her deposition testimony

2026 NY Slip Op 06417, at the official text

the plaintiff also established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the defendants' affirmative defense alleging comparative negligence by demonstrating that she was not at fault

2026 NY Slip Op 06417, at the official text

the defendants' experts found significant limitations in the range of motion of the cervical and lumbar regions of the plaintiff's spine and failed to adequately explain and substantiate their opinions that the limitations were voluntary

2026 NY Slip Op 06417, at the official text