Monette v Trummer, 2012 NY Slip Op 04854 (4th Dept. 2012)
Does this mean the interest clock does start ticking on an MSJ victory unless Plaintiff can prove that (1) Defendant was negligent, (2) the negligence was the sole proximate cause and that (3) the no-fault limitation has been breached?
There is something in that Rochester water. It is a nice to be a Defendant in the 4th Department. Perhaps, plaintiffs can bring more actions in the Syracuse City Court and Buffalo City Court?
“Plaintiffs moved for, inter alia, partial summary judgment on the issues of “liability” and serious injury. We note at the outset, however, that this Court has determined that the issue of liability “includes the issue of serious injury’ ” (Ruzycki v Baker, 301 AD2d 48, 52). Although Supreme Court in an earlier order, from which no appeal was taken, purported to grant the motion insofar as it sought partial summary judgment on the issue of “liability” with respect to Trummer and Jesse Ball but reserved decision on the issue whether plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), the court actually granted the motion only insofar as it sought partial summary judgment on the issue of negligence rather than liability (see id.).”
