Edgar Shafarenko v Fu Cheng

Annotate this Case
Shafarenko v Fu Cheng 2004 NY Slip Op 01766 [5 AD3d 585] March 15, 2004 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, May 26, 2004

Edgar Shafarenko, Appellant,
v
Fu Cheng, Respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Slavin, J.H.O.), entered November 4, 2002, which, after an inquest, dismissed the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the issue of whether he sustained a serious injury was properly decided at the inquest. The order granting his unopposed motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability did not determine that issue (see Reid v Brown, 308 AD2d 331 [2003]; Zecca v Riccardelli, 293 AD2d 31 [2002]).

The Supreme Court's determination that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence and should not be disturbed (see Mechwart v Mechwart, 292 AD2d 354 [2002]; Nado v State of New York, 220 AD2d 397 [1995]). Altman, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.