Altman v. GassmanAltman v. Gassman
—Judgment, Supreme Court, Queens County (Arthur W. Lonschein, J.), entered on or about March 17, 1992, which, after jury trial, found in favor of the defendant, and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
As there is no evidence of a "loss of use” of plaintiff’s back within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), the critical question here is whether there was error in submitting to the jury the question of a "significant limitation of use of a body function or system”, and not "permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member.” A "permanent consequential limitation” requires a greater degree of proof than a "significant limitation”, as only the former requires proof of permanency (Partlow v Meehan,
The court’s marshalling of the evidence was not unbalanced. Nor did the trial court exhibit any bias during trial. In