Opinion
April 27, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant.
The Supreme Court erred in denying the appellant's motion for summary judgment. The appellant demonstrated that the plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102 (d) ( see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955; Baldasty v. Cooper, 238 A.D.2d 367; Craft v. Brantuk, 195 A.D.2d 438; Tatti v. Cummings, 193 A.D.2d 596), and the plaintiff's evidence in opposition to the motion failed to raise a triable question of fact on that issue. The plaintiff's subjective complaints of pain were insufficient to demonstrate that he had suffered a serious injury ( see, Lincoln v. Johnson, 225 A.D.2d 593; Barrett v. Howland, 202 A.D.2d 383; LeBrun v. Joyner, 195 A.D.2d 502). Similarly, the affidavits and the affirmation of his medical experts failed to establish that the plaintiff suffered serious injury. The affidavit of Dr. Fritzner Bordeau, inter alia, did not identify any objective medical tests performed on the plaintiff ( see, Antoniou v. Duff, 204 A.D.2d 670; Lincoln v. Johnson, supra; Giannakis v. Paschilidou, 212 A.D.2d 502), and the affirmation of Dr. David Rabinovici contained only conclusory assertions tailored to meet the statutory language ( see, Lopez v. Senatore, 65 N.Y.2d 1017, 1019; Antorino v. Mordes, 202 A.D.2d 528).
Rosenblatt, J.P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.