BETHSAIDA RODRIGUEZ v. TIFFANY S. ANDERSON

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-2303-06T22303-06T2

BETHSAIDA RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

TIFFANY S. ANDERSON,

Defendant-Respondent.

_______________________________________

 

Argued October 23, 2007 - Decided

Before Judges Grall and Chambers.

On appeal from Superior Court of New

Jersey, Law Division, Essex County,

Docket No. L-6865-04.

Anthony Mazza argued the cause for

appellant (Bendit Weinstock, attorneys;

Mr. Mazza, on the brief).

Raymond Kramkowski argued the cause for

respondent (Law Offices of Linda S.

Baumann, attorneys; Mr. Kramkowski, of

counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff Bethsaida Rodriguez appeals from a final order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant Tiffany S. Anderson and dismissing plaintiff's complaint. Judge Furnari concluded that plaintiff presented insufficient evidence to maintain a suit for non-economic loss under the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act, N.J.S.A. 39:6A-1.1 to -35.

We affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Furnari in his oral decision of November 17, 2006. Considering the evidential materials presented on the motion under the standards established in Serrano v. Serrano, 183 N.J. 508, 516 (2005) and in the light most favorable to plaintiff, Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520, 540 (1995), there was no basis for a reasonable juror to conclude, on the basis of objective clinical evidence, that plaintiff sustained "a permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability." N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8(a). Under this statute, "[a]n injury [is] considered permanent when the body part . . . has not healed to function normally and will not heal to function normally with further medical treatment." Ibid. See Serrano supra, 183 N.J. at 516.

Affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-2303-06T2

November 13, 2007