| Bagot v Singh |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 00638 [59 AD3d 368] |
| February 3, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Denise Bagot, Respondent, v Kulbir Kaur Singh et al.,Appellants. |
—[*1] Louis F. Simonetti, Jr., Jericho, N.Y., for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Kings County (Saitta, J.), dated February 7, 2008, which denied their motionfor summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain aserious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of establishing that the plaintiff didnot sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result ofthe subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddyv Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). In support of their motion, the defendants reliedupon, inter alia, the affirmed medical report of their examining orthopedic surgeon in which henoted the existence of a significant limitation in the plaintiff's left knee range of motion (see Hurtte v Budget Roadside Care, 54AD3d 362 [2008]; Jenkins v MiledHacking Corp., 43 AD3d 393 [2007]; Bentivegna v Stein, 42 AD3d 555 [2007]; Zamaniyan v Vrabeck, 41 AD3d472 [2007]). Under the circumstances, it is unnecessary to consider the sufficiency of theplaintiff's opposition papers (see Hurttev Budget Roadside Care, 54 AD3d 362 [2008]; Coscia v 938 Trading Corp.,283 AD2d 538 [2001]). Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Miller, Dickerson and Eng, JJ., concur.