Ravi S.A. v. Gyebi

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, First Department, reversed a judgment dismissing the complaint and vacated the underlying order in a personal injury action involving an infant plaintiff's alleged post-traumatic stress disorder. The court held that defendants failed to establish prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the significant limitation of use claim under Insurance Law § 5102(d), but properly dismissed the permanent consequential limitation of use claim. The court also affirmed denial of the infant plaintiff's cross-motion for partial summary judgment and directed that the appellate record be sealed to protect confidential personal information.

Holdings

1. A timely notice of appeal from the judgment made reviewable the nonfinal order granting defendants summary judgment because that order necessarily affected the final judgment, even though plaintiff did not separately appeal from the order.
2. Defendants established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the infant plaintiff's PTSD claim under the permanent consequential limitation of use category, and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
3. Defendants failed to establish prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the infant plaintiff's PTSD claim under the significant limitation of use category.
4. The infant plaintiff was not entitled to partial summary judgment establishing that her PTSD constituted a significant limitation of use and therefore a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d).
5. The appellate record was ordered sealed because it contained unredacted confidential personal information concerning the infant plaintiff.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the timely appeal from the judgment made the nonfinal summary-judgment order reviewable despite the plaintiff's failure to separately appeal from that order.
2. Whether defendants established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the infant plaintiff's PTSD claim under the permanent consequential limitation of use category of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
3. Whether defendants established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the infant plaintiff's PTSD claim under the significant limitation of use category of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
4. Whether the infant plaintiff established as a matter of law that her PTSD constituted a serious injury under the significant limitation of use category.
5. Whether the appellate record should be sealed because it contained unredacted confidential personal information.

Disposition

other