| Lynch v Iqbal |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09041 [56 AD3d 621] |
| November 18, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Francine Lynch, Respondent, v Rashid Iqbal et al.,Appellants, and Mohammad Talukder et al., Respondents. |
—[*1] Friedman, Levy, Goldfarb & Weiner, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Ira H. Goldfarb and David J.Kresman of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Rashid Iqbal and YakovKaplan appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ambrosio, J.), datedDecember 17, 2007, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaintand all cross claims insofar as asserted against them on the ground that the plaintiff did notsustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the appellantsRashid Iqbal and Yakov Kaplan for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all crossclaims insofar as asserted against them is granted.
In opposition to the appellants' prima facie establishment of entitlement to summaryjudgment, the plaintiff alleged that the two scars she sustained to her chin as a result of thesubject accident constituted a significant disfigurement and, therefore, constituted a seriousinjury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). However, contrary to the plaintiff'scontentions, a reasonable person viewing the color photographs of her chin in its altered state,which she submitted in opposition to the motion, would not regard the condition as unattractive,objectionable, or as the object of pity and scorn (see Sirmans v Mannah, 300 AD2d 465[2002]; Loiseau v Maxwell, 256 AD2d 450 [1998]; [*2]Edwards v DeHaven, 155 AD2d 757 [1989]). Thus, theappellants' motion should have been granted and the complaint and all cross claims dismissedinsofar as asserted against them. Skelos, J.P., Ritter, Dillon, Carni and Leventhal, JJ., concur.