Majority
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered September 4, 1992, which granted a motion by defendants and third-party plaintiffs and a cross-motion by the third-party defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and
Defendants permissibly used unsworn reports of the plaintiffs doctors, disclosed to defendants by plaintiff (see, Lowe v Bennett, 122 AD2d 728 , 729, affd 69 NY2d 700 ), to demonstrate that plaintiffs claimed "serious injury” was based on conclusory assertions about his condition (see, Cannizzaro v King, 187 AD2d 842 , 843), and on subjective assertions of his pain (see, Coon v Brown, 192 AD2d 908 , 909). Plaintiff did not show that he was limited in any activities that could be called "daily tasks” (Sole v Kurnik, 119 AD2d 974 , 975, lv dismissed 68 NY2d 806 ), nor did he demonstrate that any of his disabilities persisted for at least 90 days during the 180 days immediately following his accident (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]).
We have considered the plaintiffs remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.
Cases cited
- Lowe v. Bennett 122 AD2d 728 at 729 p. 48
- Lowe v. Bennett 69 NY2d 700 p. 48
- Cannizzaro v. King 187 AD2d 842 at 843 p. 48
- Coon v. Brown 192 AD2d 908 at 909 p. 48