Opinion
April 9, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court found that the plaintiff's medical evidence sufficiently raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she suffered a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The medical report of the plaintiff's treating orthopedist rendered five months after the accident and after an intensive course of physiotherapy revealed that she exhibited "tenderness" and "spasm", "restricted flexion" 50 to 55 degrees, "extension 10 degrees" and "lateral bending 10 degrees" in both the cervical and lumbosacral spine, and X rays showed abnormalities in the cervical spine. One year after the accident, the plaintiff's orthopedist reexamined her and reiterated his conclusion that she suffered from the same conditions, affirming, "it is my medical opinion that the injuries complained of are of a serious and permanent nature, and due to the period of time that has elapsed, further improvement is doubtful".
We find that the plaintiff presented sufficient medical evidence of serious injury to defeat the defendant's motion for summary judgment (see, Baker v. Catania, 151 A.D.2d 629; Lopez v Senatore, 65 N.Y.2d 1017). Sullivan, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.