Opinion
2004-02219.
Decided June 14, 2004.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Huttner, J.), entered February 23, 2004, which, upon the granting of the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law made at the close of the plaintiff's case, dismissed the complaint.
Kagan Gertel, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Irving Gertel of counsel), for appellant.
Robert P. Tusa (Sweetbaum Sweetbaum, Lake Success, N.Y. [Marshall D. Sweetbaum] of P20 counsel), for respondent.
Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, SANDRA L. TOWNES, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, STEVEN W. FISHER, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, it was a provident exercise of discretion to preclude the admission into evidence of magnetic resonance imaging films in light of the plaintiff's failure to comply with the requirements of CPLR 4532-a and 22 NYCRR 202.17 ( see Neils v. Darmochwal, A.D.3d [2d Dept, Apr. 19, 2004]; Jemmott v. Lazofsky, 5 A.D.3d 558; Wagman v. Bradshaw, 292 A.D.2d 84; Grassi v. Carolina Barbeque, 254 A.D.2d 38).
The plaintiff's additional contention that the trial court erred in granting the defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law at the close of the plaintiff's case is without merit. There was no evidence of causation ( see Andre v. Seem, 234 A.D.2d 325; cf. Bonner v. Hill, 302 A.D.2d 544, 545), and there was insufficient evidence that the plaintiff sustained a serious injury ( see Insurance Law § 5102[d]).
FLORIO, J.P., KRAUSMAN, TOWNES, MASTRO and FISHER, JJ., concur.