Opinion
2003-06553.
Decided March 29, 2004.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruditsky, J.), dated June 26, 2003, as granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff Jennele Thompson did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Harry I. Katz, P.C. (Paul F. McAloon, P.C., New York, N.Y. of counsel), for appellants.
Cheven, Keely Hatzis, New York, N.Y. (Stacy R. Seldin of counsel), for respondents.
Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., ANITA R. FLORIO, HOWARD MILLER, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The defendants made a prima facie showing that the injured 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 affirmations of the injured plaintiff's physician submitted in opposition to the defendants' motion failed to establish that any of the identified limitations in movement were of a significant nature ( see Trotter v. Hart, 285 A.D.2d 772; Williams v. Ciaramella, 250 A.D.2d 763; Cabri v. Myung-Soo Park, 260 A.D.2d 525; Waldman v. Dong Kook Chang, 175 A.D.2d 204; Medina v. Zalmen Reis and Assocs., 239 A.D.2d 394).
Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.