| Dilone v Tak Leu Cheng |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09288 [56 AD3d 397] |
| November 25, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Yvonne Dilone, Appellant, v Tak Leu Cheng,Respondent. |
—[*1] Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey & Moskovits, P.C., New York (Holly E. Peck of counsel), forrespondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered July 20, 2007, which granteddefendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed,without costs.
Defendant's experts' findings, upon objective testing, that plaintiff's injuries had resolved bythe time of examination nine months after the accident demonstrated prima facie that plaintiff didnot suffer a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Brown v Achy, 9 AD3d 30, 31[2004]).
As plaintiff's submissions address her condition within 92 days of the accident, plaintifffailed to rebut defendant's experts' findings (see Hoisington v Santos, 48 AD3d 333 [2008]). Her osteopath'sreport failed to establish an adequate causal connection between plaintiff's claimed continuingrange of motion limitations and the accident. Moreover, plaintiff did not adequately explain the14-month gap in her treatment (seePommells v Perez, 4 NY3d 566, 574 [2005]).
Plaintiff's submissions were also insufficient to raise an issue of fact as to her 90/180-dayclaim (see Grimes-Carrion vCarroll, 17 AD3d 296, 297 [2005]; Thompson v Abbasi, 15 AD3d 95, 100-101 [2005]).Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Nardelli, Buckley and Freedman, JJ.