Majority
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry L. Crispino, J.), entered August 5, 2003, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
In opposition to defendants’ prima facie showing of no “serious injury” (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]), plaintiff submitted the report of his examining physician which, while denominated an affirmation, is neither affirmed nor sworn to (CPLR 2106; Grasso v Angerami, 79 NY2d 813 [1991]; Charlton v Almaraz, 278 AD2d 145 [2000]). Thus, the court properly refused to consider the unsworn report. Plaintiff’s attempt to submit a corrected affirmation for the first time on appeal to this Court is improper and we decline to consider it. In any event, the measurements of loss of range of motion described therein are not shown to be causally connected to the accident in which
Cases cited
- Grasso v. Angerami 79 NY2d 813 p. 322
- Chrisomalides v. Ekow 291 AD2d 202 p. 323
- Shinn v. Catanzaro 1 AD3d 195 p. 323
- Shaw v. Looking Glass Associates, LP 8 AD3d 100 p. 323
- Hernandez v. Lopez 9 AD3d 300 p. 323
- Noble v. Ackerman 252 AD2d 392 at 394 p. 323
- Arjona v. Calcano 7 AD3d 279 p. 323