Opinion
Submitted September 26, 2001.
October 22, 2001.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated October 6, 2000, which granted the motion of the defendants Eldad Richoolski and Dynamic Moving and Storage, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for personal injuries insofar as asserted against them on the ground that he did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d), and denied as academic his cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Ganz, Hollinger Towe, New York, N.Y. (Jeremy A. Welfer and David L. Ganz of counsel), for appellant.
Purcell Ingrao, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Mayya S. Gotlib of counsel), for respondents.
Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof denying as academic the cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for a new determination on the cross motion.
The Supreme Court properly granted the motion of the defendants Eldad Richoolski and Dynamic Moving and Storage, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for personal injuries insofar as asserted against them, as they submitted admissible evidence demonstrating their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the plaintiff failed to come forward with competent evidence to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Licari v. Elliott, 57 N.Y.2d 230, 236; Guzman v. Michael Mgt., 266 A.D.2d 508; Ryan v. Xuda, 243 A.D.2d 457; Gutierrez v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 240 A.D.2d 469; Pagano v. Kingsbury, 182 A.D.2d 268).
However, the plaintiff also had a cause of action to recover for property damage which survived the dismissal of his cause of action to recover damages for personal injuries. The Supreme Court therefore erred when it dismissed his cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability as academic.
O'BRIEN, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.