Opinion
2003-04675.
Decided May 10, 2004.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Galasso, J.), dated March 3, 2003, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Stephan Persoff, Carle Place, N.Y., for appellant.
James P. Nunemaker, Jr. Associates, Uniondale, N.Y. (Marcella Gerbasi Crewe of counsel), for respondents.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident ( see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 N.Y.2d 345; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The affidavit of the plaintiff's chiropractor submitted in opposition to the defendants' motion was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. Moreover, the plaintiff failed to submit any competent medical evidence to support a claim that she was unable to perform substantially all of her daily activities for not less than 90 of the first 180 days after the subject accident as a result of the subject accident ( see Sainte-Aime v. Ho, 274 A.D.2d 569; Jackson v. New York City Tr. Auth., 273 A.D.2d 200; Greene v. Miranda, 272 A.D.2d 441; Arshad v. Gomer, 268 A.D.2d 450; Bennett v. Reed, 263 A.D.2d 800; DiNunzio v. County of Suffolk, 256 A.D.2d 498, 499).
Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.