| Castillo v Cinquina |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 05562 [85 AD3d 660] |
| June 28, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Melissa Castillo, Appellant, v Anthony Cinquina,Respondent. |
—[*1]
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered on or about July 7, 2010,which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant's motion forsummary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the failure to establish a "permanentconsequential limitation" or "significant limitation" within the meaning of Insurance Law §5102 (d), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
Defendant made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.Defendant submitted the affirmed report of an orthopedic surgeon who, after conducting anindependent examination of plaintiff, found that she had full range of motion in her neck andback and concluded that her injuries were resolved (see Dennis v New York City Tr. Auth., 84 AD3d 579 [2011]).
In opposition, plaintiff raised triable issues of fact. Plaintiff submitted an affidavit of hertreating chiropractor who, based on testing performed both recently and contemporaneous withplaintiff's accident, found diminished range of motion in the cervical and lumbar spine andconcluded that such limitations were caused by the accident (see id.). The chiropractor'sopinion was supported by objective medical evidence, namely, MRI reports indicating thatplaintiff had bulging discs in the cervical and lumbar spine (see Toure v Avis Rent A CarSys., 98 NY2d 345, 353 [2002]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Renwick,DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.