Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was injured while being transported in Bang's (D) ambulance. The ambulance struck a curb, and a five-pound IV pump toppled from a shelf and fell on P's right forearm. P suffered bruising and continues to complain of pain and cramping in that arm, which pain allegedly limits his ability to practice as a dentist. Ps sued for negligence, alleging a serious injury. D demanded that they particularize the serious injury. P identified four of the plausible injury standards: 'significant disfigurement,' 'permanent loss of use of a body organ, member, function or system,' 'permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member' and 'significant limitation of use of a body function or system.' D moved for summary judgment. P abandoned all of the cited serious injury standards except for the 'permanent loss of use of a body organ, member, function or system' standard. The court dismissed for lack of evidence that P had suffered a serious injury. The Appellate Division affirmed: The statute requires a party claiming a partial loss of use of a body 'organ or member' to show that the limitation is 'consequential or significant,' and that plaintiff had not met that threshold. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.