| Sanchez v Williamsburg Volunteer of Hatzolah, Inc. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 01522 [48 AD3d 664] |
| February 19, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Antonio Sanchez, Respondent, v Williamsburg Volunteerof Hatzolah, Inc., et al., Appellants. |
—[*1]
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Kings County (Balter, J.), dated November 27, 2006, which denied theirmotion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground, inter alia, that theplaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants' motion forsummary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
The defendants made a prima facie showing, through the plaintiff's deposition testimony, thatthe plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d)as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345[2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 [1992]; Kearse v New York City Tr. Auth., 16 AD3d 45, 51-52 [2005]). Athis deposition, the plaintiff testified that, as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident, hemissed approximately five weeks from his job as a welder. The plaintiff's alleged injuries did notprevent him from performing "substantially all" of the material acts constituting his customarydaily activities during at least 90 out of the first 180 days following the accident (see Letellierv Walker, 222 AD2d 658 [1995]). The evidence which the plaintiff presented in oppositionto the motion failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see CPLR 3212 [b]). In view of theforegoing, we need not address the defendants' remaining contention. Prudenti, P.J., Lifson,Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.