Opinion
October 30, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.).
Ordered that the order dated January 26, 1994, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated October 26, 1994, is affirmed; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.
In Action No. 3, the defendants Anne L. Connor and William Connor submitted proof in admissible form which established that the plaintiff Neale Kurlander had not suffered a "[s]erious injury" within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The burden thus shifted to the plaintiff to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact (see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955).
The plaintiff failed to meet this burden. The only medical evidence submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the defendants' motion was an affirmation from an orthopedic surgeon which was conclusory in nature, did not specify any quantifiable limitation on the plaintiff's abilities, and did not specify what tests he performed on the plaintiff (see, Gaddy v. Eyler, supra, at 955-957; Lopez v. Senatore, 65 N.Y.2d 1017, 1019; Stallone v County of Suffolk, 209 A.D.2d 403; McHaffie v. Antieri, 190 A.D.2d 780).
The court did not err in denying the plaintiff's motion for renewal since the allegedly new evidence submitted by the plaintiff was available or obtainable upon the original motion (see, CPLR 2221; Bulis v. Di Lorenzo, 142 A.D.2d 707, 708). Sullivan, J.P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.