Opinion
2003-00018
Submitted September 10, 2003.
November 3, 2003.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Juan Gonzalez appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated October 9, 2002, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Norman Volk Associates, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Michael I. Josephs of counsel), for appellant.
Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, SANDRA L. TOWNES, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
In support of his motion for summary judgment, the defendant Juan Gonzalez established a prima facie case that the plaintiff's injuries were not serious ( see Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 956-957). In opposition, the plaintiff's medical expert failed to specify the objective tests he performed in arriving at his conclusions concerning alleged restrictions in the plaintiff's range of motion ( see Espinal v. Galicia, 290 A.D.2d 528; Greggs v. Kurlan, 290 A.D.2d 533). Accordingly, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see CPLR 3212[b]).
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, TOWNES and RIVERA, JJ., concur.