Majority
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.
The defendant met her prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955 , 956-957 [1992]). The defendant submitted competent medical evidence establishing, prima facie, that the alleged injuries to the cervical and lumbar regions of the plaintiff’s spine did not constitute serious injuries under either the permanent consequential limitation of use or significant limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Staff v Yshua, 59 AD3d 614 [2009]). In opposition, however, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained serious injuries to the cervical and lumbar regions of her spine (see Perl v Meher, 18 NY3d 208 , 218-219 [2011]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Balkin, J.P., Roman, Cohen and Connolly, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. 98 NY2d 345 p. 582
- Staff v. Yshua 59 AD3d 614 p. 582
- Perl v. Meher 18 NY3d 208 at 218-219 p. 582