Opinion
2001-07001
Submitted March 6, 2002
July 30, 2002.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Carter, J.), dated July 3, 2001, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff Ronald T. Minlionica did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d).
Jaffe Nohavicka, New York, N.Y. (Stacy R. Seldin of counsel), for appellants.
Robyn D. Weisman, Melville, N.Y., for respondents.
Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., ANITA R. FLORIO, SONDRA MILLER, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendants failed to establish, prima facie, their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the ground that the plaintiff Ronald T. Minlionica did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) (see Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc., 98 N.Y.2d 345 [July 9, 2002]; Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The affirmed report of the defendants' expert did not set forth the objective tests he performed which led him to conclude that the injured plaintiff suffered no limitation to the range of motion in his neck, back, and left wrist (see Junco v. Ranzi, 288 A.D.2d 440). Thus, we need not consider whether the plaintiffs' opposition to the motion was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Chaplin v. Taylor, 273 A.D.2d 188).
PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, S. MILLER, FRIEDMANN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.