DiCariano v. County of Rockland, et al.
Nov 27, 2013OUTCOME: Jury verdict overturned.
Trial verdict overturned. Plaintiff did not prove injuries sustained rose to level compensable under New York's No Fault Law. The Court held, "[w]e agree with the defendants' contention that there w ... as no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which, upon the evidence presented at trial, could possibly lead rational persons to the conclusion reached by the jury that the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d), and no rational process by which the jury could find in favor of the plaintiff on the issue of whether he sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d). As for the significant limitation of use category, the plaintiff failed to establish that, after the subject accident, the limitation of the use of his right knee was both significant in degree and "existed for a sufficient period of time to rise to the level of significance'" (Lively v Fernandez, 85 AD3d 981, 982). Indeed, to the extent the plaintiff established that the limitation of use of his right knee was significant in degree, the periods of limitation were nonetheless "fleeting in duration" (Partlow v Meehan, 155 AD2d 647, 648). As for the permanent consequential limitation of use category, the plaintiff failed to establish that, during a "recent" examination, there was a limitation of motion to his knee that was of consequence (Lively v Fernandez, 85 AD3d at 982; see Bacon v Bostany, 104 AD3d 625, 628; Pecora v Lawrence, 41 AD3d 1212, 1214)."
